At Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:55:38 +0100,
Chris Gilbert wrote:
> 
> On Friday 20 April 2001  2:56 pm, Ben Harris wrote:
> > In article <01042010362000.00321@pinky.paradox.demon.co.uk> you write:
> > >I've made the patch to improve the delay handling more generic.  What I've
> > >done is move the delay routine (and related check and calibration
> > > routines) into arch/arm/mainbus/cpu.c.  I've then removed all the delay
> > > routines from the different clock files. (iomd, footbridge, ofw and isa)
> > > to use the common delay routine that calls microtime.
> > >
> > >However not having all the bits of hardware to check this works I'd be
> > >grateful if people can check that the code still works as expected on all
> > >platforms.
> >
> > You'll need some way to exclude it since (e.g.) hpcarm has its own
> > implementation of delay().  Either that or rip out the hpcarm
> > implementation as well.
> 
> It's probably best to take it out of hpcarm as well then, as it is common 
> code.  common enough to possibly be shared by arm26?

delay() should use hardware timer if possible, IMO.  This is more
accurate.
How about putting your delay code in, say, delay_generic.c and linking
it conditionally using a config option?

--
IWAMOTO Toshihiro