[U-Boot] [PATCH v1 (WIP) 00/16] [Timer]API Rewrite
Wolfgang Denk
wd at denx.de
Fri Jul 15 20:34:35 CEST 2011
Dear "J. William Campbell",
In message <4E208227.6010903 at comcast.net> you wrote:
>
> If the I2C protocol must be available before interrupts are
> available, then udelay must be used. In the above examples, there are
> some loops in i2c and spi that appear to be waiting a full second. I
> assume they are using udelay because the get_timer feature is not yet
> available to them. I also assume that the example in common/usb.c uses
No, this is usually not the case. This long delay is the error case,
which most probably will never happen. For the normal case, you want
a tight spinning loop that introduces as little additional delay as
possible.
> True, although I expect you will find the statement "on all the other
> architectures" to be false. Many other architectures, yes, all, no.
> These other architectures just don't have spi or I2C yet, or if they do,
> they don't use it "early".
Are you aware of another architecture that cannot provide
sub-microsecond timer resolution? Which is it?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Make it right before you make it faster.
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list