From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Wozniak <awozniak@mc.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:26:22 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] OCOTEA get_timer() bug
In-Reply-To: <200503300913.32078.sr@denx.de>
References: <20050328195851.A1730C108D@atlas.denx.de> <200503290826.01044.sr@denx.de> <4249E219.7000507@mc.com> <200503300913.32078.sr@denx.de>
Message-ID: <424C40CE.5000202@mc.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hello Stefan,

Testing on a real OCOTEA board will be a great help.

Our target is a custom 440gx board with an OCOTEA port of U-Boot. I will 
try to do some testing to determine if there are any side affects on our 
board.

-andrew

Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wednesday 30 March 2005 01:17, Andrew Wozniak wrote:
> 
> 
>>My only concern with the fix is that it will break something else that
>>assumes the timer interval to be 10msec.  There are a few "files" that
>>depend on it for timeout operations:
>>
>>cpu/ppc4xx/440gx_enet.c
>>          if ((time_now - time_start) > 3000)   <--- 30 sec timo?
> 
> 
> This is 440 specific, but in the comments a few lines above 3 seconds timeout 
> is mentioned. So even this seems to be a bug with a 10 ms timer interval.
> 
> 
>>net/bootp.c
>>	bp->bp_secs = htons(get_timer(0) / CFG_HZ);
>>	...
>>         BootpID += get_timer(0);
>>
>>net/tftp.c
>>	TftpOurPort = 1024 + (get_timer(0) % 3072);
>>
>>net/net.c
>>post/rtc.c
>>tools/updater/flash_hw.c
> 
> 
> All this is generic code (not 440 spcific), so a 1 ms timer interval is 
> assumed.
> 
> Give me a few days and I will test it on an OCOTEA board.
> 
> Best regards,
> Stefan
>