BSP_install_rtems_irq_handler API

[VALETTE Eric]

Till Straumann wrote:

>
> 
> Well, I can't really see the "high cost" of
> 
> rtems_hdl_tbl[irq].hdl(rtems_hdl_tbl[irq].usrArg);
> 
> or at least
> 
> rtems_hdl_tbl[irq].hdl(irq);
> 
> vs.  the current implementation:
> 
> rtems_hdl_tbl[irq].hdl();



Well you have several more instructions for each interrupt and more 
important is that the API allows you to do it using redirectors.



> 
> I'm sorry - I don't understand your 'redirector' idea. The only way I could
> 
> imagine doing it is by having a redirector routine for each vector:
> 
> void redir_hdlr1(void)
> {
>    generic_hdlr(ARG1);
> }
> 
> void redir_hdlr2(void)
> {
>   generic_hdlr(ARG2);
> }
> 
> etc. IMO, this is clearly a _lot_ more unelegant, inefficient and less
> flexible
> than having the dispatcher passing at least the vector as an argument...


Why inefficient? You have an additionnal function call for *some* interrupts

but you have several instruction less for nearly all interrupts?




-- 
    __
   /  `                          Eric Valette - Canon CRF
  /--   __  o _.                 Product Dev. Group Software Team Leader
(___, / (_(_(__                 Rue de la touche lambert
                                 35517 Cesson-Sevigne  Cedex
                                 FRANCE
Tel: +33 (0)2 99 87 68 91       Fax: +33 (0)2 99 84 11 30
E-mail: valette at crf.canon.fr    http://www.crf.canon.fr