[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1288807054.16859.2.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 10:57:34 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] ARM: Translate delay.S into (mostly) C
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 14:19 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> We want to allow machines to override the __delay() implementation
> at runtime so they can use a timer based __delay() routine. It's
> easier to do this using C, so let's write udelay and friends in C.
>
> We lose the #if 0 code, which according to Russell is used "to
> make the delay loop more stable and predictable on older CPUs"
> (see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/888867 for more
> info). We shouldn't be too worried though, since we'll soon add
> functionality allowing a machine to set the __delay() loop
> themselves, thus allowing machines to resurrect the commented out
> code should they need it.
>
> Nico expressed concern that fixed lpj cmdlines will break due to
> compiler optimizations. That doesn't seem to be the case since
> before and after this patch I get the same lpj value when running
> my CPU at 19.2 MHz. That should be sufficiently slow enough to
> cover any machine running Linux.
Nico, are you ready to sign off on this?
Daniel
--
Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists