Proper /IRQ handling for multiple devices

For discussing the 65xx hardware itself or electronics projects.
User avatar
Dr Jefyll
Posts: 3526
Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Proper /IRQ handling for multiple devices

Post by Dr Jefyll »

BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
plasmo wrote:
To generate manual reset that stretches for the nominal 250ms, the reset button should connect to the VCC terminal of mcp130 and the VCC terminal should connect to 5V supply through a 1K or so current limiting resistor.

In other words, two parts are required to do the work of one. :D
In other words, you get to choose one priority (space saving) or another (cost saving), according to prevailing circumstances.

-- Jeff
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html
plasmo
Posts: 1273
Joined: 21 Dec 2018
Location: Albuquerque NM USA

Re: Proper /IRQ handling for multiple devices

Post by plasmo »

OR...I can turn a deficit into a "feature": :D

I can connect the reset button directly to the reset line and have the option of either a debounced, 250mS long reset or a not debounced, not stretched reset. Why do I want a bouncy but deterministic reset? Because there is a tiny delay between the release of master reset and when a CF disk starts accessing its disk content. Some of my bootstrap-via-CF approach exploits that delay to hijack the bootstrapping to an alternative boot method. One of those "hit a key immediately after releasing reset" trick...
Bill
User avatar
BigDumbDinosaur
Posts: 9428
Joined: 28 May 2009
Location: Midwestern USA (JB Pritzker’s dystopia)
Contact:

Re: Proper /IRQ handling for multiple devices

Post by BigDumbDinosaur »

Dr Jefyll wrote:
In other words, you get to choose one priority (space saving) or another (cost saving), according to prevailing circumstances.

Would you like fries with your burger, sir? :D

The cost vs. space dichotomy seems to be unavoidable everywhere one goes.
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!
Post Reply