[En-Nut-Discussion] Scheduling out of Interrupt sometimes take a timertick NAP

[Uwe Bonnes]

>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de> writes:

    Harald> Hi Nathan, On 09.03.2015 15:22, Nathan Moore wrote:
    >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de>
    >> wrote:
    >>> Btw. in earlier releases this function was named
    >>> NutEventPostAsync(), which IMHO better reflects its behavior. This
    >>> function is not limited to interrupt routines.
    >> 
    >> As far as I can tell there is still a NutEventPostAsync() which is
    >> different from NutEventPostFromIrq();

    Harald> This gives the lie to my explanations. I misconceived the inner
    Harald> working of NutEventPostFromIrq(). It's not an external function
    Harald> but a macro and therefore the volatile attribute is required.

Is there any reason not to rewrite NutEventPostFromIrq() as an static inline
function? That way, type checking is done by the compiler. And hopefully
your argument about the none-need for volatile for function arguments would
still hold.

Bye
-- 
Uwe Bonnes                bon at elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------