DebBarma, Tarun Kanti had written, on 06/21/2010 08:19 AM, the following: [...]
--- arch/arm/plat-omap/dmtimer.c | 131+++++++++++++++++++++--------arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/dmtimer.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/dmtimer.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/dmtimer.cindex c64875f..42344a7 --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/dmtimer.c +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/dmtimer.c @@ -160,6 +160,9 @@ struct omap_dm_timer { unsigned reserved:1; unsigned enabled:1; unsigned posted:1; +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS + unsigned ms_correction:1; +#endif }; static int dm_timer_count; @@ -185,18 +188,30 @@ static const int omap1_dm_timer_count =ARRAY_SIZE(omap1_dm_timers);#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2 static struct omap_dm_timer omap2_dm_timers[] = { - { .phys_base = 0x48028000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER1 }, - { .phys_base = 0x4802a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER2 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48078000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER3 }, - { .phys_base = 0x4807a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER4 }, - { .phys_base = 0x4807c000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER5 }, - { .phys_base = 0x4807e000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER6 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48080000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER7 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48082000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER8 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48084000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER9 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48086000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER10 }, - { .phys_base = 0x48088000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER11 }, - { .phys_base = 0x4808a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER12 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48028000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER1, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x4802a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER2, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48078000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER3, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x4807a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER4, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x4807c000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER5, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x4807e000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER6, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48080000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER7, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48082000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER8, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48084000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER9, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48086000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER10, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x48088000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER11, + .ms_correction = 0 }, + { .phys_base = 0x4808a000, .irq = INT_24XX_GPTIMER12, + .ms_correction = 0 },ignore of previous comments on .ms_correction initialization. try the output of the following code: struct b { unsigned char z:1; unsigned char a:1; }; static struct b b1[2]={ {.z =1}, {.a = 1}, }; unsigned int main() { int i; for (i=0; i<2; i++) printf("%d: %d %d\n", i, b1[i].z, b1[i].a); }This comment is not clear to me. Are you suggesting to make the initialization of ms_correction variable in a separate function instead of doing the present way?no. my suggestion is this: you dont need to do .ms_correction = 0 when the variable is static - by C standards static variables are initialized to 0. so, .ms_correction = 1 alone is needed in the specific GPTimer cases where this is needed. the example i posted shows that it works :).OK. But in this case I have to re-design / re-structure the other bit fields Viz. reserved, enabled, posted. Then we have to decide what to name the structure, etc. If you feel this is the right direction then I can go ahead.
My only complaint is with the unwanted initialization. [...] -- 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
