From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: [PATCH 02 of 10] arm: implement udelay() Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:03:54 +0000 Message-ID: <4F468D9A.3050000@cantab.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Tim Deegan Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Stefano Stabellini , Ian Campbell List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 23/02/12 17:40, Tim Deegan wrote: > arm: implement udelay() > > Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan > [...] > diff -r 4a7c14209131 -r ec051056db2b xen/arch/arm/time.c > --- a/xen/arch/arm/time.c Thu Feb 23 17:39:59 2012 +0000 > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/time.c Thu Feb 23 17:39:59 2012 +0000 > @@ -171,6 +171,16 @@ void __cpuinit init_timer_interrupt(void > request_irq(30, timer_interrupt, 0, "phytimer", NULL); > } > > +/* Wait a set number of microseconds */ > +void udelay(unsigned long usecs) > +{ > + s_time_t deadline = get_s_time() + 1000 * (s_time_t) usecs; > + do { > + dsb(); > + isb(); What are these barriers for? David > + } while ( get_s_time() - deadline < 0 ); > +} > + > /* > * Local variables: > * mode: C