----- Am 4. Sep 2019 um 23:41 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: > On 5/9/19 2:09 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I would like to wrap calls to interrupt handlers which use the generic >> interrupt >> framework (<rtems/irq-extension.h>) to get RTEMS_RECORD_INTERRUPT_ENTRY and >> RTEMS_RECORD_INTERRUPT_EXIT events. This cannot be done by the linker since >> the >> loop to call the handlers is inlined due to performance reasons. I would like >> to add some sort of a callback mechanism which is invoked in >> rtems_interrupt_handler_install() and rtems_interrupt_handler_remove() >> operations (similar to the user extensions). There are some options to do >> this. >> >> 1. A new linker set with functions. >> >> 2. A new user extension, maybe a generic: >> >> void (*event)(rtems_extension_event event, void *arg); >> >> 3. An API to install/remove a specific callback for this purpose. >> > > 4. Update or add a new API call to return the currently installed > handler. This way interrupts can be chained.
This API already exists: https://docs.rtems.org/doxygen/branches/master/group__rtems__interrupt__extension.html#ga31d23275b676018c06e13c7bedc87983 The problem with this approach is that it doesn't wrap new handlers and if you remove a wrapped handler, then a memory leak or worse may happen. > >> I am in favour of 1. I also would like to hide it from the user for now. > > Does 1. allow runtime installing and then tracing of an interrupt? I know 3. > would. Yes, 1., 2., and 3. do the same, the difference is how you install the wrapper functionality and maybe how many you can install. 5. Use a weak function. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
