Re: Delays, clocks, timers, hrtimers, etc

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

Mason wrote:
Q1. the {n,u,m}delay function family


Timers are preferred because of the problems with the software delay loop.

Can you confirm that if one intends to use timer-based delays, one must
call register_current_timer_delay at init?

There aren't many callers of register_current_timer_delay.

  arch/arm/kernel/arch_timer.c:   register_current_timer_delay(&arch_delay_timer);
  arch/arm/mach-u300/timer.c:     register_current_timer_delay(&u300_delay_timer);
  drivers/clocksource/nomadik-mtu.c:      register_current_timer_delay(&mtu_delay_timer);

Does that mean that every other platform is using software delay-loops
instead of timer-based delay-loops?

(AFAIU, architected / generic timers are new-ish in Cortex A7 and A15.)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Devel]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux