??? 12/14/04 02:11 Read: times |
#83029 - Use different method Responding to: ???'s previous message |
As the others have said - staying in an ISR for a long time is counter-productive. Maybe to solve your problem you need to approach it differently. I gather you want to do *something* as long as the input is active and this input is most likely a switch of some sort as you have a debounce time. You are probably better off using a timer to poll this input at a regular interval - say 10mS. Also, try to limit calling subroutines from the ISR - it causes more register usage to keep track of and bloats up the stack. As Erik mentions - keep the ISRs short and sweet. Using an interrupt input for a switch input is normally not a good idea - except if you want to wake up the cpu from sleep mode! |
Topic | Author | Date |
LPC932 WDT Triggered by Ext. Int. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
please carify | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Here is! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How to post code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Oh no you don't! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Wrong Numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
disable int in ISR is worthless | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
disable int in ISR is worthless | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
wd trigger | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
wdt feeds from main | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
what effect does that have | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
You are Right | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
KISS | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
So! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
info, please | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
WDT | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
puppy chow | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Interrupts - back to basics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Kick that dog in the interrupt | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Not generally a good idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Use different method![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |