Missed doc change in #850 #2302
Open
+2
−0
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lurch
reviewed
Feb 19, 2025
| @@ -615,6 +615,8 @@ static inline void gpio_add_raw_irq_handler(uint gpio, irq_handler_t handler) { | |||
| * | |||
| * This method removes such a callback, and enables the "default" callback for the specified GPIOs. | |||
| * | |||
| * \note You should always use the same gpio_mask as you used when you added the raw IRQ handler. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wondered why this was the case, since it seems like you should be able to do:
gpio_add_raw_irq_handler_masked((1<<0) | (1<<1) | (1<< 2), my_handler);
gpio_remove_raw_irq_handler_masked((1<<1), my_handler);and then expect to have my_handler still running for GPIOs 0 and 2. But looking at the code for gpio_remove_raw_irq_handler_masked I see that it just does a blunt:
irq_remove_handler(IO_IRQ_BANK0, handler);rather than only removing the handler when all of its masked pins have been removed (IYSWIM).
Would supporting this more refined approach (which I guess would require storing a mapping from handlers to masks) be too slow or use up too much memory?
And just out of curiosity, how does
void gpio_remove_raw_irq_handler_masked(uint32_t gpio_mask, irq_handler_t handler) {
assert(raw_irq_mask[get_core_num()] & gpio_mask); // should not remove handlers that are not added
irq_remove_handler(IO_IRQ_BANK0, handler);
raw_irq_mask[get_core_num()] &= ~gpio_mask;
}re-enable the "default" callback for each of the pins in the mask? Similarly, I can't see how
void gpio_add_raw_irq_handler_with_order_priority_masked(uint32_t gpio_mask, irq_handler_t handler, uint8_t order_priority) {
hard_assert(!(raw_irq_mask[get_core_num()] & gpio_mask)); // should not add multiple handlers for the same event
raw_irq_mask[get_core_num()] |= gpio_mask;
irq_add_shared_handler(IO_IRQ_BANK0, handler, order_priority);
}
void gpio_add_raw_irq_handler_masked(uint32_t gpio_mask, irq_handler_t handler) {
gpio_add_raw_irq_handler_with_order_priority_masked(gpio_mask, handler, GPIO_RAW_IRQ_HANDLER_DEFAULT_ORDER_PRIORITY);
}disables the "default" callback for the masked pins? 🤔
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
found this dangling while cleaning up github branchs