{Quote hidden}> >> >movwf INTCON
> >> >andlw 0x07
> >> >addwf PCL
> >> >goto test1
> >> >goto test2
> >> >goto test3
> >> >etc..
> >> >etc...
> >> >
> >>
> >> With this scheme, would not the subroutine accessed by test3
> >> have to service "both" bit 0 and bit 1 interrupts?
> >
> >It would _have_ to service at least one of the them. It _could_ service
> >both.
> >
>
> Then all you have done is required "another" filter at the
> next level down to sort bit 0 from bit 1. And then test7 would
> require 3 filters, I believe.
Or you could implement a priority scheme with the table entries. For
entries that have multiple interrupt conditions, just jump to the handler
for the highest priority one. In other words 7 entries but only 3 different
handler routines.
*****************************************************************
Olin Lathrop, embedded systems consultant in Devens Massachusetts
(978) 772-3129, .....olinspam_OUT
embedinc.com, http://www.embedinc.com
--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
BY
:
Olin Lathrop email (remove spam text)