[U-Boot] [RFC] Review of U-Boot timer API

[Scott McNutt]

Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> On 25/05/11 22:36, Scott McNutt wrote:
>> Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> OK, let's wind back - My original suggestion made no claim towards changing
>>> what the API is used for, or how it looks to those who use it (for all
>>> practical intents and purposes). I suggested:
>>>  - Removing set_timer() and reset_timer()
>>>  - Implement get_timer() as a platform independent function
>> Why do you suggest removing set_timer() and reset_timer() ?
>>
> 
> Because if the timer API is done right, they are not needed

To continue the wind back ...

In several implementations, reset_timer() actually reloads
or re-initializes the hardware timer. This has the effect of
synchronizing get_timer() calls with subsequent interrupts.
This prevents the early timeouts if the implementer chooses
to use an interrupt rate less than 1 ms.

So my original question was, how do we address this issue?

--Scott