From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kevin.morfitt at fearnside-systems.co.uk Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:52:39 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH-ARM] CONFIG_SYS_HZ fix for ARM902T S3C24X0 Boards In-Reply-To: <20090907221816.BC79B832E8DE@gemini.denx.de> References: <4AA284B9.8030009@fearnside-systems.co.uk> <20090907214701.47D21832E8DE@gemini.denx.de> <4AA583AC.3050401@fearnside-systems.co.uk> <20090907221816.BC79B832E8DE@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <4AA58EB7.3040008@fearnside-systems.co.uk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 07/09/2009 23:18, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear "kevin.morfitt at fearnside-systems.co.uk", > > In message <4AA583AC.3050401@fearnside-systems.co.uk> you wrote: >>> In message <4AA284B9.8030009@fearnside-systems.co.uk> you wrote: >>>> This sets CONFIG_SYS_HZ to 1000 for all boards that use the s3c2400 and >>>> s3c2410 cpu's which fixes various problems such as the timeouts in tftp being >>>> too short. >>> I still wonder if this is really an issue. Some s3c2400 based boards >>> have been in production use for several years, with volumes of many >>> thousands of devices per year. Yet no TFTP timeout issues have been >>> reported ever. > ... >> I think there were no problems because CONFIG_SYS_HZ was set to values that >> worked for each of the s3c24x0 boards. I only submitted the patch because my > > I'm confused - above you write "various problems such as the timeouts > in tftp being too short", now you write: "there were no problems". > > Which one is correct? > When I ported the SBC2440-II Board based on the existing sbc2410x code without applying this patch the tftp timeouts were too short. When I apply this patch as part of the SBC2440-II port the tftp timeouts are OK. I haven't got any other s3c24x0 boards so I don't know whether they do have tftp timeout problems or not, I only know that I saw them on my SBC2440-II port. My comment "there were no problems" was based on you saying "Yet no TFTP timeout issues have been reported ever". Best Regards Kevin Morfitt >> I'm happy to withdraw the patch if it's OK to set CONFIG_SYS_HZ to a different >> value than 1000? > > CONFIG_SYS_HZ is a constant with the value 1000. Board that use > different values shall be fixed. > > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4403 (20090907) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com