RE: [avr-libc-dev] What about to make 'reti' as a default behaviour?

[Weddington, Eric]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marek Michalkiewicz [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 4:45 PM
> To: Weddington, Eric
> Cc: Dmitry K.; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] What about to make 'reti' as a 
> default behaviour?
> 
> 
> Not always safe - if interrupt is level triggered, and remains
> active, the main program will be interrupted again and again...
> This will make the main program run much slower (interrupt and
> "reti" after every instruction), but work fine otherwise - so
> it may be difficult to notice the bug (no handler defined for an
> enabled interrupt).  

Hi Marek!

Good points!

> An infinite loop might be even better than
> either "reti" or jump to zero (WDT will then do a proper reset).

Ok, that makes sense. It should make it easy to spot for the end-user.

Eric