On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:02 PM, loody <miloody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > hi all: > If i trace source in the correct place, I found udelay(100) is > implemented as a loop which decrease 1 per iteration until the count, > 100, as 0. > What makes me confused is since the speed of cpus are different and > that will make udelay not precise on different platform, right? Yeah, it may be not precise, so, some processors, like Cavium octeon have added their own timestamp register based delay functions, please refer to: arch/mips/cavium-octeon/csrc-octeon.c The delay_tsc() for X86 defined in arch/x86/lib/delay.c is similar. But both of them are 64bit timestamp registers. We can also apply similar method to add the precise delays for the other CPUs, but we may need to take extra notice: 1. If the CPU only provides 32bit timestamp registers(e.g R4K MIPS), overflow should be considered. 2. If the CPU support dynamic CPU frequency and the frequency of the timestamp binds to the CPU's frequency, the scaled down timestamp should be converted to the real timestamp. Regards, Wu Zhangjin > > -- > Regards, > miloody > >
