linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch] Generic time trailing clean-ups

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Subject: Re: [patch] Generic time trailing clean-ups
From: Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:52:46 -0700
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, jsun@mvista.com
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1030814182619.17768B-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl>; from macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl on Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 06:35:28PM +0200
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20030814091326.A1203@mvista.com> <Pine.GSO.3.96.1030814182619.17768B-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 06:35:28PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Jun Sun wrote:
> 
> > I am completely lost in your arguments.  Let us keep it to the basic.
> > 
> > Tell me what is wrong with the following, and why your proposal
> > is better than this:
> > 
> > 1) get rid of calibrate_*() function
> > 2) introduce a generic counter frequence calibration routine, which
> >    is only invoked when mips_counter_frequency is 0.
> > 3) If any board is not happy with this calibration, it is free to
> >    do its calibration in board_timer_init(), which would set
> >    mips_counter_frequency to be non-zero.
> 
>  So I am lost, too.  What I proposed with the patch is exactly what you
> describe above.  So what's wrong with it?
>

Oh, really? :)

1) I don't see you " get rid of calibrate_*() function"
2) oh, why? because your "generic counter frequence" is not generic -
   it requires board-specific routines.  I was referring to using
   jiffies to calibrate frequency.
3) I also don't see picky boards "do its calibration in board_timer_init()".

Your proposal differs in every count. :)

Jun

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>