Dear Andrew, In message <aanlktim48uhnd2wg0jcqs-eiz2t_cgv-duvatpzh6...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/sa1100/timer.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/sa1100/timer.c > >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ void reset_timer (void) > >> > >> ulong get_timer (ulong base) > >> { > >> - return get_timer_masked (); > >> + return get_timer_masked () - base; > > > > This patch is wrong. The get_timer() code is as it was designed to be. > > If it is causing problems, then the caller must be fixed. > > Hmmm. I put the same patch in a long time ago for imx for the same reason. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/45922 > Looking at some other arm timer implementations they do it the same way.
Hm... ouch... Guess this needs fixing. > I see the cfi_flash code now has reset_timer calls sprinkled through > it that should make the base offset functionality in the timer mostly > a nop (assuming it's implemented). Maybe the OP has old cfi_flash > code? Well, "sprinkled" - I see exactly two such calls. And I think these are only needed because the implementer did not understand the concept of how to implement a timeout using unsigned arithmentic in a way that works even when the timer wraps around. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower. - R. Pirsig, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot