[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v8 03/10] arm/arm64: a

From: Christopher Covington
Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v8 03/10] arm/arm64: add some delay routines
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 10:27:25 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2

On 12/09/2016 07:15 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:41:06AM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 08/12/16 17:50, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>> Allow a thread to wait some specified amount of time. Can
>>> specify in cycles, usecs, and msecs.

>>> +++ b/lib/arm/asm/delay.h
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
>>> +#ifndef _ASMARM_DELAY_H_
>>> +#define _ASMARM_DELAY_H_
>>> +/*
>>> + * Copyright (C) 2016, Red Hat Inc, Andrew Jones <address@hidden>
>>> + *
>>> + * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU LGPL, version 2.
>>> + */
>>> +#include <libcflat.h>
>>> +
>>> +extern void delay(u64 cycles);
>> Nit: Shouldn't this parameter be called "ticks"? Cycles might be a bit
>> misleading, especially since this prototype is the only documentation on
>> this. You might just want to fix this when applying the patches.
> Right or wrong the kernel uses 'cycles' for this function, named
> __timer_delay for arm and __delay for arm64. I guess I prefer
> consistency here.

I too expect timers to tick and CPUs to cycle. The benefit of
parameter-name-precise consistency with the Linux source is not
obvious to me.


Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code
Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]