When the correction for bug #3071596 was implemented, two issues were overlooked. Firstly, only INT1 and INT2 were added; some supported devices have INT3 as well. Secondly, the behaviour of INT0 was explicitly left alone. This is wrong, because the existing behaviour matches the 14-bit core; on the 18F core INT0 is like INT1..3 and should be implemented as such.
Anonymous
Now working on a fix. Noticed that the regression test attempts to verify both edges but makes no effort to check which edge is actually sensitive (or indeed whether they both are).
This was nominally fixed at r2147, but there is no regression test for the INT3 input (available on 18F6520 but not the 2321 that the regression test uses)
Hi Robert,
I found the same problem when using gpsim with pic16F877.
When INTEDG bit is cleared in OPTION_REG, the datasheet says the interrupt should trigger on falling edge of RB0/INT pin. But it still triggers on the rising edge when simulating with gpsim.
Brilliant tool otherwise!
Stan
Hi Robert,
I tested v0.27 and confirm that pic16F877 INT0 triggers correctly on falling edge when INTEDG bit is cleared in OPTION_REG, The previous message was wrong, sorry for the confusion.
Stan