On 9/5/2014 1:40 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 04/09/14 18:16, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Joel Sherrill
>> <joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com> wrote:
>>>> ---
>>>> c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/csb337/startup/bspreset.c | 1 +
>>>> c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/raspberrypi/Makefile.am | 2 +-
>>>> .../lib/libbsp/arm/raspberrypi/startup/bspreset.c | 35 ------------
>>>> testsuites/sptests/spintr_err01/init.c | 65
>>>> +++++++++++-----------
>>>> 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
>>>> delete mode 100644 c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/raspberrypi/startup/bspreset.c
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/csb337/startup/bspreset.c
>>>> b/c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/csb337/startup/bspreset.c
>>>> index 1167d92..940ff7f 100644
>>>> --- a/c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/csb337/startup/bspreset.c
>>>> +++ b/c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/csb337/startup/bspreset.c
>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ void bsp_reset(void)
>>>> {
>>>> rtems_interrupt_level level;
>>>>
>>>> + (void) level;
>>>> rtems_interrupt_disable(level);
>> Is it ok to put (void) level; and then use level?
>>
> Logically it makes more sense to use
>
> rtems_interrupt_disable(level);
> (void) level;
>
> since rtems_interrupt_disable() sets the level, but we are only interested in
> the side-effects of rtems_interrupt_disable() and not the level itself.
>
Do you want me to swap the lines?
--
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
