len0rd/FreeRTOS-Kernel
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel.git synced 2025-08-20 10:08:33 -04:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Revert the formatting changes on MikroC ports. (#882)

Browse source 
Co-authored-by: Rahul Kar <118818625+kar-rahul-aws@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gaurav-Aggarwal-AWS <33462878+aggarg@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Soren Ptak 2023-11-23 02:20:15 -08:00 • committed by GitHub
parent a8a17dc4b5
commit 2dfc5142f4
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
2 changed files with 97 additions and 101 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

32
portable/MikroC/ARM_CM4F/port.c
View file

@ -345,22 +345,22 @@ BaseType_t xPortStartScheduler( void )
if( ulImplementedPrioBits == 8 )
{
/* When the hardware implements 8 priority bits, there is no way for
* the software to configure PRIGROUP to not have sub-priorities. As
* a result, the least significant bit is always used for sub-priority
* and there are 128 preemption priorities and 2 sub-priorities.
*
* This may cause some confusion in some cases - for example, if
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY is set to 5, both 5 and 4
* priority interrupts will be masked in Critical Sections as those
* are at the same preemption priority. This may appear confusing as
* 4 is higher (numerically lower) priority than
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY and therefore, should not
* have been masked. Instead, if we set configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY
* to 4, this confusion does not happen and the behaviour remains the same.
*
* The following assert ensures that the sub-priority bit in the
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY is clear to avoid the above mentioned
* confusion. */
* the software to configure PRIGROUP to not have sub-priorities. As
* a result, the least significant bit is always used for sub-priority
* and there are 128 preemption priorities and 2 sub-priorities.
*
* This may cause some confusion in some cases - for example, if
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY is set to 5, both 5 and 4
* priority interrupts will be masked in Critical Sections as those
* are at the same preemption priority. This may appear confusing as
* 4 is higher (numerically lower) priority than
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY and therefore, should not
* have been masked. Instead, if we set configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY
* to 4, this confusion does not happen and the behaviour remains the same.
*
* The following assert ensures that the sub-priority bit in the
* configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY is clear to avoid the above mentioned
* confusion. */
configASSERT( ( configMAX_SYSCALL_INTERRUPT_PRIORITY & 0x1U ) == 0U );
ulMaxPRIGROUPValue = 0;
}