Skip to content

Conversation

facchinm
Copy link
Member

@facchinm facchinm commented Oct 7, 2025

No description provided.

Copy link

@DhruvaG2000 DhruvaG2000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

zephyrCommon: Fixed a bug in the interrupt handler acquisition

Why include this commit as part of a PR for support for UNO Q?
Can it be a separate PR of it's own please?

@facchinm
Copy link
Member Author

facchinm commented Oct 9, 2025

zephyrCommon: Fixed a bug in the interrupt handler acquisition

Why include this commit as part of a PR for support for UNO Q? Can it be a separate PR of it's own please?

@pillo79 can you send it as a different PR? (and remove from this branch)

@pillo79 pillo79 changed the title Add support for UNO Q board: Add support for UNO Q Oct 9, 2025
pillo79 and others added 14 commits October 9, 2025 14:14
Take into account the analog switch
Use RBIT intrinsic (if available) instead of the slow software reverse. Note that RBIT is at least ~2x faster: Reverse Function Benchmark ========================== Current implementation: 18 ms Optimized implementation: 8 ms Speedup: 2.25x Signed-off-by: iabdalkader <i.abdalkader@gmail.com>
The main optimization eliminates the double MODER register write when on=true. Previously: MODER &= ~(0xFFFFFF) then MODER |= pin_bits (two writes) Now: MODER = 0 when off, or MODER = pin_bits when on (single write each) Otherwise, the compiler is already doing a pretty good job. Additional improvements: - Remove unused idxToPin() function (was just returning idx) - Remove unused reverse() function - Use direct pin array access and bit shifts for efficiency Signed-off-by: iabdalkader <i.abdalkader@gmail.com>
this commit can be reverted as soon as the libraries are added to library manager
@pillo79
Copy link

pillo79 commented Oct 9, 2025

zephyrCommon: Fixed a bug in the interrupt handler acquisition

Why include this commit as part of a PR for support for UNO Q? Can it be a separate PR of it's own please?

@pillo79 can you send it as a different PR? (and remove from this branch)

#203 was already opened a few weeks ago, this commit being included was a leftover from all the rebases during the Uno Q release process. Fixed!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
5 participants