On 11/05/2015 07:00 AM, Fu Wei wrote:
Hi Timur,
On 5 November 2015 at 22:40, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fu Wei wrote:
Did you really read the "Note" above???????? OK, let me paste it again
and again:
SBSA 2.3 Page 23 :
If a larger watch period is required then the compare value can be
programmed directly into the compare value register.
Well, okay. Sorry, I should have read what you pasted more closely. But I
Thanks for reading it again.
think that means during initialization, not during the WS0 timeout.
I really don't see SBSA say "during initialization, not during the WS0 timeout",
please point it out the page number and the line number in SBSA spec.
maybe I miss it?
Thanks for your help in advance.
Anyway, I still don't like the fact that you're programming WCV in the
"you don't like" doesn't mean "it is wrong" or "we can't do this", so
I will keep this way unless we have better idea to extend second stage
timeout.
interrupt handler, but I'm not going to make a big deal about it any more.
Deal, Thanks a lot.
The problem with your driver, as I see it, is that dealing with WS0/WS1
and pretimeout makes the driver so complex that, at least for my part,
I am very wary about it. The driver could long since have been accepted
if it were not for that. Besides that, I really believe that any system designer
using the highest permitted frequency should be willing to live with the
consequences, and not force the implementation of a a complex driver.
Ultimately, you'll have to decide if you want a simple driver accepted, or
a complex driver hanging in the review queue forever.
Thanks,
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
