Why _ThreadProcessSignalsFromIrq() in new exception processing?

[Sergei Organov]

Valette Eric <eric.valette at free.fr> writes:
> Sergei Organov wrote:
> 
> > Aren't On/Off/isOn called while interrupt processing as well? If not, then
> > their usefulness is even less than I thought before.
> 
> Look at the code!!!

Do you begin to hate me so much that just don't want to tell? :-) Or did
you forget if they are called or not? :-)

You don't need to scream at me, really. Could you please point me to the
particular file in the RTEMS I can take a look into? I'm afraid to look
at wrong place without your guidance and to provoke your anger once again.

> And show me your ugly code to handle the SIU/CPM or OpenPIC 8259 management
> in each ISR.

Calling 'ugly' something that doesn't exist makes no sense to me. I don't have
code for OpenPIC, but I do have my own code for some other controllers.
Hopefully you won't call it ugly without at least looking at it, right?

While I'm not familiar with OpenPIC 8259, I'll try to understand what is
written there (as soon as you tell me where exactly to look) and maybe then
I'll agree that the approach you have chosen is the best I've ever seen or
imagine.

> 
> > Overall, this discussion seems to be too abstract to me. You think you are
> > right, I think I'm right. Care to give an example code that certainly
> > benefits from the approach you've taken in the new exception processing
> > when compared to other possible approaches?
> 
> I showed my code as it is available in RTEMS now, show me your ugly ISR
> service routine...

I don't have ugly ISR service routines yet, sorry :-)

-- 
Sergei.