[Tinyos-host-mote-wg] Re: [Tinyos-2.0wg] proposed Scheduler interface change

[Jan Hauer]

> Clearly, I'm not being clear. The answer to the comment above is "Of
> course". The only question is: should that __nesc_disable_interrupts
> be:
> a) inside __nesc_atomic_sleep
> b) or, after the call to __nesc_atomic_sleep, inside taskLoop
> ? (I was arguing for a, i.e., changing the definition of __nesc_atomic_sleep)

OK, I just wanted to be sure about that. Personally, I'd prefer a),
then __nesc_atomic_sleep is entered with disabled interrupts and it
will return that way, which is more consistent.

Jan


>
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinyos-2.0wg mailing list
> Tinyos-2.0wg at Mail.Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
> https://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-2.0wg
>
>

_______________________________________________
Tinyos-2.0wg mailing list
Tinyos-2.0wg at Mail.Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
https://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-2.0wg