Stack-friendly cc243x clock ISR enabled by default
This new approach (CLOCK_CONF_ACCURATE=0) was not as inaccurate as originally thought. In fact, it has pretty much the same accuracy as the old, stack-hungry version. * Renamed the define from CLOCK_CONF_ACCURATE (1: old) to CLOCK_CONF_STACK_FRIENDLY (1: new) to stop implying that one is more accurate than the other. * Using CLOCK_CONF_STACK_FRIENDLY by default.
This commit is contained in:
parent
924fe934c1
commit
ce17fa131c
3 changed files with 16 additions and 21 deletions
|
@ -54,10 +54,7 @@ static __data int len;
|
|||
#define PUTCHAR(...) do {} while(0)
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#if !CLOCK_CONF_ACCURATE
|
||||
extern volatile __data clock_time_t count;
|
||||
/* accurate clock is stack hungry */
|
||||
#if CLOCK_CONF_STACK_FRIENDLY
|
||||
extern volatile __bit sleep_flag;
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -294,11 +291,10 @@ main(void)
|
|||
/* Reset watchdog and handle polls and events */
|
||||
watchdog_periodic();
|
||||
|
||||
/**/
|
||||
#if !CLOCK_CONF_ACCURATE
|
||||
#if CLOCK_CONF_STACK_FRIENDLY
|
||||
if(sleep_flag) {
|
||||
if(etimer_pending() &&
|
||||
(etimer_next_expiration_time() - count - 1) > MAX_TICKS) { /*core/sys/etimer.c*/
|
||||
(etimer_next_expiration_time() - clock_time() - 1) > MAX_TICKS) {
|
||||
etimer_request_poll();
|
||||
}
|
||||
sleep_flag = 0;
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue