On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 21:52 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > +static struct sunxi_timer *timer_base = > > + &((struct sunxi_timer_reg *)SUNXI_TIMER_BASE)->timer[TIMER_NUM]; > > + > > +/* macro to read the 32 bit timer: since it decrements, we invert read > > value */ +#define READ_TIMER() (~readl(&timer_base->val)) > > This macro has to go, just use ~readl() in place. But still, why do you use > that > negation in "~readl()" anyway ?
The comment right above it explains why: the timer counts backwards and inverting it accounts for that. This is subtle enough that I don't think using ~readl() in place in the 3 callers would be an improvement. Ian. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
