Migration to SD functions

[Ck]

I have to update my non soft device source code to SD because now I will use Radio.

My question is if it is necessary to rewrite all functions which are in SD API. Like:

NVIC_SetPriority(ADC_IRQn, APP_IRQ_PRIORITY_LOW);
NVIC_ClearPendingIRQ(ADC_IRQn);
NVIC_EnableIRQ(ADC_IRQn);
NRF_POWER->SYSTEMOFF = 1;	
NRF_CLOCK->TASKS_HFCLKSTART = 1;
NRF_RTC1->EVENTS_COMPARE[0] = 0;
__WFI();
__WFE();
and similiar

I'm assume that SD alternate function has just some assert to control if I'm passing right arguments or so. So if I'm sure I didn't use any resources against SD, is it necessary to use strictly only SD functions?

[Nikita]

You can see in S110_SoftDevice_Specification_v1 3.pdf there is a list of peripherals used by softdevice in "Table 23 Peripheral protection and usage by SoftDevice".

Any direct access to the protected resources while softdevice is enabled will generate hard fault by softdevice, so you must use softdevice calls to access to this resources.

[Ck]

I'm not using any peripheral used by SD, but I'm using IRQ handlers for non restrictred or blocked peripherals (I hope at least this is OK), various power modes and HF clock start/stop (so here I have to use alternate SD funcs). BTW sd_app_evt_wait() is waiting for event or irq, what about if I want strictly wait for irq as it is done by __WFI()?

[Nikita]

but I'm using IRQ handlers for non restrictred or blocked peripherals (I hope at least this is OK)

Yes, it's ok, you only need to use sd_nvic_* instead of NVIC_*.

BTW sd_app_evt_wait() is waiting for event or irq, what about if I want strictly wait for irq as it is done by __WFI()?

There is no way to do it, softdevice has only this one function for both irq and events together. Softdevice handles both irq and events and after softdevice handles them first then softdevice will send software interrupt to the application.

[RK]

If you are absolutely using only the interrupts, resources and priority levels (important) that you are allowed to use then in reality you can get away with using the NVIC_* calls, it ends up being the same thing. The sd_ calls just check the parameters and hardfault you if you, even accidentally, do something incorrect.

I have mine #defined so I can switch between the two of them after going through dev testing if I want, it's a bit quicker calling the NVIC ones directly as you don't have to go through a SVC call. By the time I get to that point I'm pretty sure I'm doing the right thing.

[Ck]

Thanks for reply.
Now I'm confused with another thing. From SD examples i see this SD setup:

uint32_t err_code = sd_softdevice_enable(NRF_CLOCK_LFCLKSRC_XTAL_50_PPM, 
                                             softdevice_assert_callback);
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);

    // Configure application-specific interrupts. Set application IRQ to lowest priority and enable 
    // application IRQ (triggered from ANT protocol stack).
    err_code = sd_nvic_SetPriority(SD_EVT_IRQn, NRF_APP_PRIORITY_LOW); 
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
    err_code = sd_nvic_EnableIRQ(SD_EVT_IRQn);      
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);

What is SD_EVT_IRQn?
It's not regular peripheral IRQ, I suppose it's some kind of callback used by SD stack? But from comment it seems like it should set priority of my IRQ in app globally to lowest priority, so I don't need to set individually priority by sd_nvic_SetPriority() ?