Imberton Guilhem-gimb01 had written, on 10/22/2009 04:04 PM, the following:
I have one small comment on the actual implementation
+ do {
+ value = prm_read_mod_reg(OMAP3430_GR_MOD,
+ OMAP3_PRM_VC_BYPASS_VAL_OFFSET)
+ & OMAP3430_VALID;
+ /* should i wait? */
+ if (value && (count % 50))
+ udelay(10);
+ count--;
+ *timeout_us -= 5;
+ } while (value && count);
Why are you removing 5us every read ?
Thanks for catching this. Yep, I have got my counters mixed up :(.. will
add it as part of v2 for tomorrow evening with other potential comments
if any.
If 50 iteration is 1us and we delay every loop by 10us we should remove 11us
Shouldn't it be:
+ do {
+ value = prm_read_mod_reg(OMAP3430_GR_MOD,
+ OMAP3_PRM_VC_BYPASS_VAL_OFFSET)
+ & OMAP3430_VALID;
+ /* should i wait? */
+ if (value && (count % 50)) {
+ udelay(10);
+ *timeout_us -= 11;
+ }
+ count--;
+ } while (value && count);
here is a problem with the above logic:
a) I dont know for sure if 50 iterations == 1 uSec.
b) count = timeout*5
==> if function is called with timeout = 10 uSec, count = 50, and
udelay(10) will be called once. now *timeout -=11 will make it a
negative value, which is not helpeful.
so, the decrement has to be by 10 OR i can pad timeout_us .. not exactly
useful either..
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
