CPU interrupts: Difference between revisions
(Add I flag set points to tick-by-tick breakdowns) |
(No PC increments at all for IRQ/NMI) |
||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
</pre> | </pre> | ||
Similarly, an NMI can hijack an IRQ, and an IRQ can hijack a BRK (though it won't be as visible since they use the same interrupt vector). The tick-by-tick breakdown of all types of interrupts is essentially like that of BRK, save for whether the B bit is pushed as set and whether | Similarly, an NMI can hijack an IRQ, and an IRQ can hijack a BRK (though it won't be as visible since they use the same interrupt vector). The tick-by-tick breakdown of all types of interrupts is essentially like that of BRK, save for whether the B bit is pushed as set and whether PC increments occur. | ||
=== IRQ and NMI tick-by-tick execution === | === IRQ and NMI tick-by-tick execution === |
Revision as of 14:26, 12 April 2013
Nitty-gritty interrupt handling primer
The NMI input is edge-sensitive (reacts to high->low transitions in the signal) while IRQ is level-sensitive (reacts to the signal level). Both are active low. NMI is polled every CPU cycle (to be able to detect transitions in the middle of an instruction), while IRQ is usually polled during the last cycle of an instruction (before the opcode fetch for the next instruction). If the polling operation detects that the interrupt line has been asserted, the next "instruction" executed is the interrupt sequence. The point where IRQ is polled is also the point where the CPU deals with NMI assertion.
Branch instructions and interrupts
The branch instructions have more subtle interrupt polling behavior. Interrupts are always polled during the second CPU cycle (during the operand fetch). Additionally, for taken branches that cross a page boundary, interrupts are polled during the PCH fixup cycle (see [1] for a tick-by-tick breakdown of the branch instructions). An interrupt being detected at either of these polling points (including only being detected at the first one) will trigger a CPU interrupt.
Interrupt hijacking
The MOS 6502 and by extension the 2A03/07 has a quirk that can cause one type of interrupt to partially hijack another type if they occur very close to one another.
For example, if NMI is asserted during the first four ticks of a BRK instruction, the BRK instruction will execute normally at first (an additional PC increment will occur compared to other interrupt types, and the status word will be pushed with the B flag set), but execution will branch to the NMI vector instead of the IRQ/BRK vector:
Each [] is a CPU tick. [...] is whatever tick precedes the BRK opcode fetch. Asserting NMI during the interval marked with * causes a branch to the NMI routine instead of the IRQ/BRK routine. ******************** [...][BRK][BRK][BRK][BRK][BRK][BRK][BRK]
In a tick-by-tick breakdown of BRK, this looks like
# address R/W description --- ------- --- ----------------------------------------------- 1 PC R fetch opcode, increment PC 2 PC R read next instruction byte (and throw it away), increment PC 3 $0100,S W push PCH on stack, decrement S 4 $0100,S W push PCL on stack, decrement S *** At this point, the signal status determines which interrupt vector is used *** 5 $0100,S W push P on stack (with B flag set), decrement S 6 $FFFE R fetch PCL, set I flag 7 $FFFF R fetch PCH
Similarly, an NMI can hijack an IRQ, and an IRQ can hijack a BRK (though it won't be as visible since they use the same interrupt vector). The tick-by-tick breakdown of all types of interrupts is essentially like that of BRK, save for whether the B bit is pushed as set and whether PC increments occur.
IRQ and NMI tick-by-tick execution
For exposition and to emphasize similarity with BRK, here's the tick-by-tick breakdown of IRQ and NMI (derived from Visual 6502). IRQ and NMI trigger after the instruction during which they're asserted (but see the next section for caveats).
# address R/W description --- ------- --- ----------------------------------------------- 1 PC R fetch opcode (and discard it - $00 (BRK) is forced into the opcode register instead) 2 PC R read next instruction byte (actually the same as above, since PC increment is suppressed. Also discarded.) 3 $0100,S W push PCH on stack, decrement S 4 $0100,S W push PCL on stack, decrement S *** At this point, the signal status determines which interrupt vector is used *** 5 $0100,S W push P on stack (with B flag *clear*), decrement S 6 A R fetch PCL (A = FFFE for IRQ, A = FFFA for NMI), set I flag 7 A R fetch PCH (A = FFFF for IRQ, A = FFFB for NMI)
Delayed IRQ response after CLI, SEI, and PLP
(The below description was pulled from blargg's cpu_interrupts_v2.)
The RTI instruction affects IRQ inhibition immediately. If an IRQ is pending and an RTI is executed that clears the I flag, the CPU will invoke the IRQ handler immediately after RTI finishes executing.
The CLI, SEI, and PLP instructions effectively delay changes to the I flag until after the next instruction. For example, if an interrupt is pending and the I flag is currently set, executing CLI will execute the next instruction before the CPU invokes the IRQ handler. This delay only affects inhibition, not the value of the I flag itself; CLI followed by PHP will leave the I flag cleared in the saved status byte on the stack (bit 2), as expected.
The above behavior is likely due to the I flag not changing until after the last tick of CLI, SEI, and PLP, meaning the next instruction will already have begun executing when the new value becomes effective.
Notes
- The above interrupt hijacking and IRQ response behavior is tested by the cpu_interrupts_v2 test ROM.
- For more quirky behavior related to VBlank NMI's from the PPU, see PPU frame timing.
- The B status flag doesn't physically exist inside the CPU, and only appears as different values being pushed for bit 4 of the saved status bits by BRK and NMI/IRQ.
- For a more technical description of what causes the hijacking behavior, see Visual6502's writeup.