On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Joel Sherrill <joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com> wrote: > > On 8/8/2014 8:54 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote: >> Hi, >> The macro CPU_ISR_PASSES_FRAME_POINTER is part of a cpu port defined >> in cpu.h, but this macro seems to be unused. I don't know what the >> purpose of it was intended. Anyway, it appears to be wrong for some >> architectures (ARM and sparc64 at least, maybe others). Should we >> remove the macro, or find a use for it and make sure it is correctly >> defined for each arch? > The intent is that for simple vectored, some architectures passed a vector > number and some passed a vector number and a pointer to the interrupt > stack frame. This predates the addition of the PIC model. > > In general terms, I don't know if all simple vectored architectures > pass one or two parameters. > > Is this used anywhere in the tree? Sometimes drivers would use it to > adjust the ISR handler prototype to avoid warnings. It's used only at isr.h:62
62 #if (CPU_ISR_PASSES_FRAME_POINTER == 1) 63 typedef ISR_Handler ( *ISR_Handler_entry )( 64 ISR_Vector_number, 65 CPU_Interrupt_frame * 66 ); 67 #else 68 typedef ISR_Handler ( *ISR_Handler_entry )( 69 ISR_Vector_number 70 ); 71 #endif >> Gedare >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > -- > Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development > joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research > Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 > Support Available (256) 722-9985 > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
