public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Reinhard Meyer <u-boot@emk-elektronik.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] ARM timing code refactoring
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 08:50:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3D2F34.6020903@emk-elektronik.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D3D2942.4060600@free.fr>

Dear all,

its quite funny to see how we go around in circles here, this proposal of Albert
now is quite close to my original proposal. Only that I factored the ms_to_ticks
AND the comparison into the timer calls:

u64 timer_setup(u32 timeout_in_ms)
{
	return get_ticks() + ms_to_ticks(timeout_in_ms);
}

int timer_expired(u64 endtime)
{
	/*
	 * convert the unsigned difference to signed, to easyly
	 * check for "carry". In assembly we could just do a BCC
	 * after the subtraction to see whether get_ticks()
	 * has passed ahead of endtime.
	 */
	return (signed)(endtime - get_ticks()) < 0;
}

What can be more pragmatic and trivial than those two functions??

Usage then:

 	/* let's wait 200 milliseconds */
 	u64 endtime = timer_setup(200);
 	do {
 		...
 	} while (!timer_expired(endtime));

 
> That's where I come back to one point of my proposal: if we can get a 
> general framework for get_timer() to return a 64-bit free-running tick 

We have that already at least on PowerPC and AT91. Its called u64 get_ticks(void)
and returns a free running 64 bit value. An associated function,
u64 get_tbclk(void) returns the frequency of that tick.

I don't think that this part of the framework needs to be discussed -
except *maybe* for function names.

> value, then we might not need a ms-based get_time() at all, because we 
> could use get_timer() as well for ms timings, provided we can convert 
> our timeout from ms to ticks, i.e.
> 
> 	/* let's wait 200 milliseconds */
> 	/* Timing loop uses ticks: convert 200 ms to 'timeout' ticks */
> 	timeout = ms_to_ticks(200);
> 	u32 start = get_timer(); /* start time, in ticks */
> 	do {
> 		...
> 	} while ( (get_timer() -start) < timeout);

Mandatory u64 for start AND timeout, please.
It is the same functionality as my proposal, just bears more places where
"users" might make mistakes.

But I am sure that Wolfgang will not like either of our proposals, because
the variables used in "userspace" are not in ms.

Reinhard

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-24  7:50 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   ` [U-Boot] [RFC] U-boot Albert ARIBAUD
2011-01-22 19:19 ` [U-Boot] [RFC] ARM timing code refactoring 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 [this message]
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=4D3D2F34.6020903@emk-elektronik.de \
    --to=u-boot@emk-elektronik.de \
    --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