From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:28:06 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Fix bootdelay timeout calculation when SYS_HZ!=1000 In-Reply-To: <514B264F.2000306@ti.com> References: <1363842874-8286-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20130321065553.BC624200547@gemini.denx.de> <514B1036.3090400@ti.com> <20130321143540.B01CF200547@gemini.denx.de> <20130321144145.GG26945@bill-the-cat> <514B264F.2000306@ti.com> Message-ID: <514B2706.9090706@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/21/2013 11:25 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 03/21/2013 09:41 AM, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:35:40PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >>> Dear Tom, >>> >>> In message <514B1036.3090400@ti.com> you wrote: >>>> >>>>> A system with CONFIG_SYS_HZ != 1000 is _broken_. >>>> >>>> So, RPi is going higher, and Jon hit this on I suspect >>>> omap2420h4 which is also higher (after mathing that all out). >>>> If we no longer support CONFIG_SYS_HZ != 1000 we need to make >>>> that clear (and explain why). >>> >>> It has never been supported, so this is not a case of "no >>> longer". There are several longish threads (about the timer >>> code, especially on ARM) in the archives. >> >> OK, then we need to do something about these platforms today. >> I'm guessing RPi can just be tuned down to 1000 but for >> omap2420h4 it's an interesting value and I don't know about the >> platform well enough to say what we'd need to do to adapt it. >> Jon? > > For OMAP2420, we have a choice of using either a 12MHz or 32kHz > clock to drive the timer. With the 32kHz clock we can get close to > 1000Hz tick but we cannot get it dead on. That's why OMAP has been > using 128Hz tick in the kernel as opposed to 100Hz tick in the > kernel for years (although that was changed recently). The rest of the OMAP/related platforsm in U-Boot accept that as "good" enough I guess since they've been setting to 1000 for a while / since they went in (depending on the platform in particular). So if you have time to whack 2420 over and give it some quick testing I'd appreciate it. Thanks! - -- Tom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRSycGAAoJENk4IS6UOR1WXIQQAIZOPSG04jMTavV8rBykXnjL WQAvUmnGeAs7A2sMXfq+1HhXkLK/hMKHYR5IRLEx0asYuOXZ+sls9oPBxwpXHYQq zMRcoEZRbWkz/Ell0Pe6gyN4LesCvTd+Zt+nV/Rs+oO0o3ITtqYOzTNOfaNwyftC xXBUCXi9ecMnKhJb00IrAuELvU1kyb54v9tuJQNkw6ML0cWxTQiQFgzfMT8lRf/E DwSaDxdQEi4+CzmXDE7VClx0P5R5GDd3NhtaQ8lz9w6mPoJ/GyFmYI4PIWAqsscO ryRyrJlPx0KusmMZrtVMdBJqeXi4rU1vsrAqHsbntPWTt7WznyHOdELDtSoUbwHE WotIW3+xqckNKNYjPYpWU1syRlWUqPK+wbHfB0bEVEtdPNQCBJ/jT34c/Ur4V7fn aAJkhaimH/oWKtBiZD2hEUKZzsILrUpH0mk0S4xra5mHVDacypaeJ6xK1h0vkZTw CoRHXH05JZlLJf1NXP3lRg/b8NUEH4Z/nGvQpmHUOySgPiGYs1CQx6f+3A8P2Rrd W9TQ+fSWxtRzRUuHf18QdYFP5MCvWwgRuvquxsqlUAULzWYbisSb66TUY4vOyYZG 6htN9/wZEinsbmGlx6yTA6RBijSMP3kpSswwyN/Y1AHNP04MQO+Gflii9NvdtsRM 1jQ6as+M3YHCh7jAdINj =yJ2h -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----