[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201012081353.44927.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:53:44 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Guan Xuetao" <guanxuetao@...c.pku.edu.cn>
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2
On Wednesday 08 December 2010, Guan Xuetao wrote:
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,390 @@
> > > +/* 0 */ CALL(sys_restart_syscall)
> > > + CALL(sys_exit)
> > > + CALL(sys_fork_wrapper)
> > > + CALL(sys_read)
> > > + CALL(sys_write)
> > > +/* 5 */ CALL(sys_open)
> > > + CALL(sys_close)
> >
> > When you start using the generic unistd.h file, you can also replace this table
> > with something like arch/tile/kernel/sys.c.
> Well. I will use the generic unistd.h in UniCore-64 version.
I thought you had agreed to break ABI compatibility with your existing
code base and use the generic ABI everywhere.
Did I misunderstand you or did you make up your mind since then?
> > Hmm, when the architecture was being defined, why didn't you ask for a
> > cycle counter? It really improves the delay code a lot.
> No software readable cycle counter in UniCore32.
>
> > If you have a good time base by now, you should use it. Is the OST_OSCR
> > something you could use here?
> OST_OSCR is much coarse in here, which is 14.318M Hz.
Ok, I see.
Arnd
--
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