Hi Jon,
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 20:46:12, Hunter, Jon wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 05:07 AM, Mohammed, Afzal wrote:
> >> Or maybe should the timings be grouped as ...
> >>
> >> General
> >> Read Async
> >> Read Async Address/Data Multiplexed
> >> Read Sync
> >> Read Sync Address/Data Multiplexed
> >> Write Async
> >> Write Async Address/Data Multiplexed
> >> Write Sync
> >> Write Sync Address/Data Multiplexed
> >>
> >> There may be some duplication but it will be clear where things like ADV
> >> timing applies.
> >
> > I would prefer to keep it concise, but no strong opinion on it, if you
> > prefer as above, I will change it.
>
> I think that if these represent the main use-case configurations this
> could add some value.
Ok
> >>> + gpmc_convert_ps_to_ns(gpmc_t);
> >
> >> I am wondering if we could avoid this above function and then ...
> >
> > This will be removed once it is confirmed that all the peripherals
> > using custom runtime calculation can work with this generic
> > routine. Then all calculation would be purely in ps.
>
> Ok, great. May be add a TODO here to make this clear that this is temporary.
Sure
Regards
Afzal
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
