On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 05:54:53PM -0600, Andrei Warkentin wrote: > The TimerDxe implementation doesn't account for the physical > time passed due to timer handler execution or (perhaps even > more importantly) time spent with interrupts masked. > > Other implementations (e.g. like the Arm one) do. If the > timer tick is always incremented at a fixed rate, then > you can slow down UEFI's perception of time by running > long sections of code in a critical section. > > Cc: Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com> > Cc: Daniel Schaefer <g...@danielschaefer.me> > Signed-off-by: Andrei Warkentin <andrei.warken...@intel.com> > --- > UefiCpuPkg/CpuTimerDxeRiscV64/Timer.c | 33 +++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > Reviewed-by: Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#100492): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/100492 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/97196085/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
