> Well, to me READ_TIMER() sounds like a function/macro to read some
> value from some timer; if that timer counts doen, then successive
> calls to that macro/function would return decreasing values. Counting
> up or down is a property of the specific timer and should be handled
> elsewhere; such p
Dear Alessandro Rubini,
In message <20091103152354.ga12...@mail.gnudd.com> you wrote:
> > Um... why is READ_TIMER doing such a stupid thing as negating values?
>
> Because the counter counts down. I could have returns "0 - value" or
> "~value". Since I chose the latter initially, this fix keeps
> Um... why is READ_TIMER doing such a stupid thing as negating values?
Because the counter counts down. I could have returns "0 - value" or
"~value". Since I chose the latter initially, this fix keeps the same
approach. I can't return the value I read, since it goes backwards.
/alessandro
Dear Alessandro Rubini,
In message <20091103121250.ga8...@mail.gnudd.com> you wrote:
> From: Alessandro Rubini
>
> The timer decrements and READ_TIMER() negates the value read.
> Writing 0 in reset_timer() is this wrong, as a readback before 400us
> will read back 0 and will report 1780 seconds,
From: Alessandro Rubini
The timer decrements and READ_TIMER() negates the value read.
Writing 0 in reset_timer() is this wrong, as a readback before 400us
will read back 0 and will report 1780 seconds, so nand operations did
timeout. This patch writes ~0 in reset_timer to prevent this.
Signed-o
5 matches
Mail list logo
