|To:||Franck Bui-Huu <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject:||Re: [PATCH 3/5] Deforest the function pointer jungle in the time code.|
|From:||Sergei Shtylyov <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:31:30 +0400|
|Cc:||Atsushi Nemoto <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com|
|Organization:||MontaVista Software Inc.|
|References:||<firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <467811D0.email@example.com>|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803|
Hello, I wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:33:33 +0200, "Franck Bui-Huu" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:> What do you mean by "pnx8550 can have customized copy of cp0_hpt > routines" ? Do you mean that it should copy the whole clock event > driver ?
> It seems to me that using cp0 hpt as a clock event only is a valid usage...
Well, I thought the customized cp0 clockevent codes (custom .set_next_event routine is needed anyway, isn't it?)
I don't think so.
hpt-cp0.c clock event part doesn't care if the counter is cleared when an interrupt is triggered.
Well, in the generic case it must read back the Count reg. before writing to the Compare reg. and for PNX8550 this is unnecessary -- but indeed, should not harm...
Well, I was thinking the counter stops at 0 after being clearesd by the match when writing this, which is not the case. So, ignore this sentese.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [PATCH 3/5] Deforest the function pointer jungle in the time code., Sergei Shtylyov|
|Next by Date:||Re: [SPAM] Re: "Segfault/illegal instruction" - udevd - ntpd - glibc, Markus Gothe|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [PATCH 3/5] Deforest the function pointer jungle in the time code., Sergei Shtylyov|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [PATCH 3/5] Deforest the function pointer jungle in the time code., Sergei Shtylyov|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|