function and isr

what is the difference between jump to a function and jump to the isr? what are the steps involved?

Is this a question asked in a class at school? If so, I would question their teaching methods. Rather than discussing 'functions' and 'ISRs' in general, I think it would be much more beneficial to learn about a certain architecture (CPU/language/OS/...) and how it all works within the architecture. There would not be a need for such questions then. After all, engineers deal with certain architectures in their work, they don't speculate about 'functions' and 'ISRs' in general.
This reminds me how at my first electronics lesson I was confronted with a sofisticated model of a bipolar transistor valid from 0 Hz to 1 GHz. Now I realize that you should start thinking about a transistor as a simple switching device, later extending the model to cover other use cases. Incompetent teachers...

what is the difference between jump to a function and jump to the isr? what are the steps involved?

Is this a question asked in a class at school? If so, I would question their teaching methods. Rather than discussing 'functions' and 'ISRs' in general, I think it would be much more beneficial to learn about a certain architecture (CPU/language/OS/...) and how it all works within the architecture. There would not be a need for such questions then. After all, engineers deal with certain architectures in their work, they don't speculate about 'functions' and 'ISRs' in general.
This reminds me how at my first electronics lesson I was confronted with a sofisticated model of a bipolar transistor valid from 0 Hz to 1 GHz. Now I realize that you should start thinking about a transistor as a simple switching device, later extending the model to cover other use cases. Incompetent teachers...

"Incompetent teachers..."

When I was at college, I was told that a function should have no more than three lines of code.

"Rather than discussing 'functions' and 'ISRs' in general, I think it would be much more beneficial to learn about a certain architecture"

I disagree!

The concept of the "function" call & return is pretty fundamental whatever architecture you use, and whatever language. It is also important to understand the difference from an "unstructured" jump.

Similarly for interrupts - and you need to understand the concept of the interrupt in order to know the place of an interrupt handler (or "service routine")

It is important to undersand the concepts before moving on to the implementation in any particular language and/or architecture.

That's my opinion, anyhow...

The concept of the "function" call & return is pretty fundamental whatever architecture you use, and whatever language. It is also important to understand the difference from an "unstructured" jump.

I am not suggesting to scrap the teaching of concepts. I'm just trying to say that once you intruduce a concept, you should show how it works within a certain architecture. This will show the students the practical significance of the concept and help keep them interested.