Shinribo
Shinribo
I am open to both ideas. If we create a wrapper crate then i will definetly need some assistance as it would be my first crate.
Sorry for the delay I thought about both ways and IMHO it would be better to add the wrapper to the spin crate for now
If you don't disagree i would start with a wrapper for Mutex and RwLock and add critical section as a optional dependency
So i changed the implementation but i cant get IrqMutexGuard::leak() to work properly, i currently dont know how to fix it. Also if we keep IrqMutexGuard::leak() i need to add...
I thew out lock-api for now as i am currently not sufficiently familiar with it, i would readd it once i am sure that it can work with the interrupt...
> I am having second thoughts about the implementation of this type in `spin`. > > After looking closer, it seems that `critical-section` already [provides its own `Mutex` implementation](https://docs.rs/critical-section/1.1.2/critical_section/struct.Mutex.html). The...
Adding a new Mutex instead of changing the expected behavior of the currently used Mutex makes sense. However i dont understand how disabling interrupts when the lock is held would...
So, will IrqMutex be added to the crate in the forseeable future?
I dont see any portable way to do it unless conditional compiling is used and for every supported ISA two small inline? assembly stubs are used. My idea would be...
i currenlty dont see how this would interfere with calling a enable/disable interrupts function before and after some atomic operations. But maybe im thinking the wrong way. For example if...