From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753078Ab1BVOTM (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:19:12 -0500 Received: from mprc.pku.edu.cn ([162.105.203.9]:43577 "EHLO mprc.pku.edu.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752247Ab1BVOTK (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:19:10 -0500 From: "Guan Xuetao" To: "'Arnd Bergmann'" Cc: , , "'Greg KH'" References: <02f301cbcb48$bebea4c0$3c3bee40$@mprc.pku.edu.cn> <201102171831.16713.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <201102171831.16713.arnd@arndb.de> Subject: RE: [PATCHv2 09/11] unicore32 core architecture: timer and time handling Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:19:04 +0800 Message-ID: <018c01cbd29b$759a4740$60ced5c0$@mprc.pku.edu.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQH8AKscRheQ/HHApBgo+X/sOK9QJQIXuRX2k5x3OnA= Content-Language: zh-cn Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de] > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 1:31 AM > To: Guan Xuetao > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arch@vger.kernel.org; 'Greg KH' > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 09/11] unicore32 core architecture: timer and time handling > > On Sunday 13 February 2011, Guan Xuetao wrote: > > > diff --git a/arch/unicore32/include/asm/timex.h b/arch/unicore32/include/asm/timex.h > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..faf16ba > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/unicore32/include/asm/timex.h > > +#ifndef __UNICORE_TIMEX_H__ > > +#define __UNICORE_TIMEX_H__ > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_FPGA > > + > > +/* in FPGA, APB clock is 33M, and OST clock is 32K, */ > > +/* so, 1M is selected for timer interrupt correctly */ > > +#define CLOCK_TICK_RATE (32*1024) > > + > > +#endif > > + > > +#if defined(CONFIG_PUV3_DB0913) \ > > + || defined(CONFIG_PUV3_NB0916) \ > > + || defined(CONFIG_PUV3_SMW0919) > > + > > +#define CLOCK_TICK_RATE (14318000) > > + > > +#endif > > I believe that we don't use CLOCK_TICK_RATE in the kernel any more, > so there is no reason to define it. CLOCK_TICK_RATE is an important value for the kernel. And perhaps I misunderstanding your meaning... > > Arnd Thanks & Regards. Guan Xuetao