From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 01:19:25 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1 v3] console: USB: KBD: Fix incorrect autoboot timeout In-Reply-To: <514A4CBA.1040203@ti.com> References: <1359025555-15119-1-git-send-email-jilin@nvidia.com> <514A4CBA.1040203@ti.com> Message-ID: <201303210119.26050.marex@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Jon Hunter, > On 01/24/2013 05:05 AM, Jim Lin wrote: > > Autoboot timeout defined by CONFIG_BOOTDELAY will not be accurate if > > CONFIG_USB_KEYBOARD and CONFIG_SYS_USB_EVENT_POLL are defined in > > configuration file and when tstc() function for checking key pressed > > takes longer time than 10 ms (e.g., 50 ms) to finish. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jim Lin > > --- > > > > Changes in v2: > > - use do-while and get_timer to count timeout. > > > > Changes in v3: > > - revert original udelay(10000); for safety. > > > > common/main.c | 10 +++++----- > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/main.c b/common/main.c > > index b145f85..dcd2a42 100644 > > --- a/common/main.c > > +++ b/common/main.c > > @@ -225,6 +225,7 @@ static inline > > > > int abortboot(int bootdelay) > > { > > > > int abort = 0; > > > > + unsigned long ts; > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_MENUPROMPT > > > > printf(CONFIG_MENUPROMPT); > > > > @@ -248,11 +249,10 @@ int abortboot(int bootdelay) > > > > #endif > > > > while ((bootdelay > 0) && (!abort)) { > > > > - int i; > > - > > > > --bootdelay; > > > > - /* delay 100 * 10ms */ > > - for (i=0; !abort && i<100; ++i) { > > + /* delay 1000 ms */ > > + ts = get_timer(0); > > + do { > > > > if (tstc()) { /* we got a key press */ > > > > abort = 1; /* don't auto boot */ > > bootdelay = 0; /* no more delay */ > > > > @@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ int abortboot(int bootdelay) > > > > break; > > > > } > > udelay(10000); > > > > - } > > + } while (!abort && get_timer(ts) < 1000); > > > > printf("\b\b\b%2d ", bootdelay); > > > > } > > This change is causing problems with auto-delay on one of my boards by > making it inaccurate :-( > > The question is what should get_timer() be returning? If it is meant to > be milliseconds then I guess I need to fix get_timer() for my board. > However, if it is just meant to be timer ticks at the SYS_HZ rate then I > don't see how the above change guarantees the do-while loop waits 1000 > ms per iteration without normalising to SYS_HZ. What board is it ? Best regards, Marek Vasut