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

[Graeme Russ]

Hi Scott,

On Wednesday, May 25, 2011, Scott McNutt <smcnutt at psyent.com> wrote:
> 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?

We fix them dear Liza dear Liza ;)

That is what this thread is trying to figure out

Regards,

Graeme