| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2821 |
TIL: The instruction after SEI can be executed before a pending IRQ is handled
As described here: http://visual6502.org/wiki/index.php?title=6502_Timing_of_Inter..
I never knew this, after all those years, and thought i'd share this as a heads-up.
Thanks to Bubis for pointing it out to me! |
|
... 89 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5017 |
Groppie, except your bugs werent caused by the sei/cli pair, but the irq setup wasnt timed correctly. and the bugs could have been even worse if those irq inits were interrupted by the raster irqs. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11090 |
again, let me write it in bold for you:
IF the IRQ setup had been timed correctly THEN SEI/CLI would not have been required. and Blindlessly using SEI/CLI made it "work" WITH THE BUGS.
and sure, without SEI/CLI the broken setup might have not worked at all. i totally prefer this over halfassed buggy glitchfest however. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5017 |
"without SEI/CLI the broken setup might have not worked at all."
thank you. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2821 |
It's not uncommon that bugs cause erroneous behaviour only in the presence of other bugs. Fix only either, and the other lies dormant until some later time, fix both and you win. :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11090 |
indeed, that sei/cli stuff only masked other - and bigger - problems. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5017 |
Quote: It's not uncommon that bugs cause erroneous behaviour only in the presence of other bugs. Fix only either, and the other lies dormant until some later time, fix both and you win. :)
sei/cli wasnt there to fix a bug. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11090 |
time for some classic rock |
| |
Copyfault
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 466 |
Quoting KrillHmm, what does that setup from timer IRQ save? I don't see the shortening (and you'd also have to ack the IRQ yourself). :) Ah, you're right with that acknowledging of the IRQ which would come "on top".
Quoting KrillAnd please explain your notion of "irq-levels". How many are there? Are interrupt handlers themselves interrupted? Are there more banking settings than all-RAM ($30/$34) for main loop and with IO ($35) for interrupt handlers? Something going via $0314/15? Yes, what did I mean with "irq-level" *questioningmyself*? I just wanted to distinguish between a "level=0" situation which would be code running outside any irq (which usually is the main loop) and a "level>0" situation for code running inside an IRQ. As there is a certain priority among the different IRQ triggers (e.g. NMI beats Raster), one could define the "irq-level" along these priorities; alternatively, an irq-level could also describe the "depth" of the IRQ trigger chain which occurs when an IRQ is triggered on code running inside an IRQ and so on, but...
...but for the case I had in mind, the terms "main loop" and "inside Raster IRQ" suffice, so I better switch to these now. Usually, I have a main loop running and a raster irq set up. I want a clear separation between the memory access: full ram ($01=$34) in the main loop and IO ($01=$35) in the irq code. As there are usually some IO-registers to be initialised during init, I at least need $01=$35 once in the main loop. By misusing the CIA1-irq as stated in one of my former postings I could avoid this and have all IO accesses inside the IRQ.
Which leaves me with a little question. Is it possible to have an IRQ execution directly after the write cycle of that STA $D019?
...
sta $d019
-> irq possible _before_ the next instruction?? <-
dec $01
...
(has influence on the irq code, i.e. wether an INC $01 at the beginning suffices or a LDA#$35:STA$01 is a must -> +2 bytes :/)
Even more benefit would most probably come together when misusing that CIA1-IRQ of the basic startup for init when using timer irqs instead of raster irqs. But I'll stop now, toooo much text already :) |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2821 |
Quoting CopyfaultIs it possible to have an IRQ execution directly after the write cycle of that STA $D019? [...] (has influence on the irq code, i.e. wether an INC $01 at the beginning suffices or a LDA#$35:STA$01 is a must You ack a possibly pending raster IRQ with the write access to $d019, but any potentially arising subsequent raster IRQ condition should not trigger an actual IRQ before you enable the raster IRQs via $d01a. This will be when you have already set up your IRQ handler, and that one will behave and properly backup and restore $01. So i guess INC $01 works. |
| |
spider-j
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 443 |
Quoting Krillbut any potentially arising subsequent raster IRQ condition should not trigger an actual IRQ before you enable the raster IRQs via $d01a.
Do I understand correctly that when setting up a raster IRQ without SEI/CLI the write to $d01a is the "pendant" to CLI?
So according to you guys the correct way (coming from BASIC) would be:
lda #$7f
sta $dc0d
; ...
; do init stuff ( $01 config etc. )
; setup $fffe/$ffff and $d011 / $d012 for raster IRQ
; ...
lda #$01
sta $d01a ; raster IRQ is able to fire after this (?)
?!?
No need for $d019 in this case, is that correct? |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 - Next |
