Re: Spurious interrupt on ARM.

Sorry, I should have been a bit more clear.
First we skip the ISR by jumping to the spurious_IRQ label, and then we 
switch stacks if necessary, then we have (line numbers may vary):

941        // The return value from the handler (in r0) will indicate 
whether a
942        // DSR is to be posted. Pass this together with a pointer to the
943        // interrupt object we have just used to the interrupt tidy 
up routine.
944
945                              // don't run this for spurious interrupts!
946        cmp     v1,#CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_NONE
947        beq     17f
948        ldr     r1,.hal_interrupt_objects
949        ldr     r1,[r1,v1,lsl #2]
950        mov     r2,v6           // register frame
951
952        THUMB_MODE(r3,10)
953
954        bl      interrupt_end   // post any bottom layer handler
955                                // threads and call scheduler
956        ARM_MODE(r1,10)
957 17:

So it compares the result of hal_IRQ_handler (stored in v1) with 
CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_NONE, and jumps forwards to label 17: which is 
after interrupt_end. if it was a spurious IRQ.

Andrew

On 01/11/2013 17:06, Nick Garnett wrote:
>
> On 31/10/13 17:15, Andrew Parlane wrote:
>> Looking at hal/arm/arch/current/src/vectors.S in IRQ:
>>
>> We increment the scheduler lock and decrement it again in interrupt_end.
>>
>> In the case of there being a spurious interrupt, we don't call
>> interrupt_end, and so the scheduler never gets decremented.
>>
>> Am I missing something here?
> interrupt_end() does get called. A spurious interrupt only causes the
> code to skip calling an ISR by jumping to the spurious_IRQ label. From
> there it follows the same code path and will call interrupt_end() as normal.
>



-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss