From: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.aribaud@free.fr>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] U-boot
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 13:22:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3ACC00.3040400@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D3AB8BC.8060805@emk-elektronik.de>
Hi Reinhard,
Le 22/01/2011 12:00, Reinhard Meyer a ?crit :
> Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
>
> this is not an ARM local issue.
Well, there *is* an ARM specific side of it (use of gd variables during
relocation), and that is what prompted me to start the RFC, but
generalization to U-boot is welcome if it leads to a satisfactory
solution. If not, at least I'll adopt a solution for ARM.
> The timeouts are used in generic drivers all around u-boot.
>
> Have a grep for get_timer, reset_timer...
>
> The most ugly use is with reset_timer involved, where the internal
> pseudo-tick is reset to zero, so all calls to get_timer are
> relative to that moment.
>
> We are looking at replacing all those occurrences of reset_timer
> and get_timer with "better" methods.
Seems to me this replacement is quite straightforward, as most uses of
reset_timer() and subsequent get_timer are actually loops, functionally
the same as our proposals, only instead of using a local to store the
start or end time, they reset ticks to zero -- which, I concur, is a Bad
Thing.
But 'reset_timer()' calls just need to be replaced with your 'timeout =
timeout_init(N)' or my 'then = now()' and 'get_timer() > N' or
'get_timer_masked() > N' by your 'time_out(timeout)' or my
'ms_elapsed(N)'. Seems to me like a tedious effort, possibly involving
occasional time-out value conversions, but not a difficulty.
What do I miss?
> Best Regards,
> Reinhard
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-22 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-22 10:20 [U-Boot] [RFC] ARM timing code refactoring Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-22 10:42 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-22 11:32 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-22 11:00 ` [U-Boot] [RFC] U-boot (was: ARM) " Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-22 12:22 ` Albert ARIBAUD [this message]
2011-01-22 19:19 ` [U-Boot] [RFC] ARM " Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-22 20:17 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-22 21:26 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-22 21:51 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-23 10:12 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-23 10:26 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-23 16:23 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-23 18:47 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-23 19:35 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-23 20:59 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-23 21:22 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-23 22:01 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-23 22:57 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-24 1:42 ` J. William Campbell
2011-01-24 7:24 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-24 7:50 ` Reinhard Meyer
2011-01-24 12:59 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-24 8:25 ` Andreas Bießmann
2011-01-24 11:58 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-24 12:06 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-24 12:58 ` Andreas Bießmann
2011-01-24 12:54 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-24 13:02 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-24 16:23 ` J. William Campbell
2011-01-22 22:13 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-23 16:15 ` Wolfgang Denk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D3ACC00.3040400@free.fr \
--to=albert.aribaud@free.fr \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox