On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 11:55 PM Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 10/10/2019 01:25, Gedare Bloom wrote: > >>>> Interrupts with cap.can_raise set and cap.has_peripheral cleared can be > >>>> safely software controlled and used for tests. > >>> Why not just have an "is_software_triggered"? > >> As a replacement for has_peripheral? > >> > > yes, it seems that if an interrupt is software triggered, then it > > cannot have a peripheral. I don't know if the opposite is true though, > > I guess there can be interrupt lines that are not software triggered, > > but don't have a peripheral attached to them, but then they are not > > active lines they can't actually raise an interrupt. I don't know if > > that makes any sense. > > On some controllers you can trigger every interrupt vector by software. > On some you you can only trigger a subset. On some systems, some > interrupt vectors are not available and cannot be triggered at all, e.g. > chip variant A supports hardware modules M0, M1, and M2, variant B > supports only M0, so the vectors used by M1 and M2 are not used (disabled). > OK, then for the purpose of testing, you would want to know if a vector "can_be_software_triggered" even if it "has_peripheral" so both should be included I think.
> -- > Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH > > Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany > Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 > Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 > E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > PGP : Public key available on request. > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
