Re: 89C51ED2
- From: "TT_Man" <Someone@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 20:38:29 +0100
"Jamie" <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%LUwk.38434$Fr1.3855@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
TT_Man wrote:
I guess that would be fine if you didn't have any higher priority INT'sHmmm that's not how to code 8051 inrterrupts.
Huh??????
Do you mean that you don't save the interrupted context???? !!!!!
I can't remember my reason for saying that now. Flags perhaps ?
Anyway PL/M handles all that for one. Declare procedure interrupt !
Graham
Coding in assembler opens all sorts of clever trick possibilities that
HLL guys would never have dreamed of. That only comes with years of
developing RT asm code. Why push a couple of status bytes when they can
be saved in half the time by moving them to registers in the current
bank.......... Doesn't work for everyone though......
doing the same thing or calling functions with in that block that are also
doing the same thing.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"
Functions and things should be kept out of int service routines..... set a
flag, and handle it in a background scheduler...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- References:
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: TT_Man
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: TT_Man
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: TT_Man
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: MooseFET
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Eeyore
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: TT_Man
- Re: 89C51ED2
- From: Jamie
- Re: 89C51ED2
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Why welfare doesn't work!
- Next by Date: Re: 89C51ED2
- Previous by thread: Re: 89C51ED2
- Next by thread: Re: 89C51ED2
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|