On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 06:28:41PM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > Add external programmer delay functions so external programmers can > handle the delay on their own if needed. > > Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <[email protected]> ...but see below. > Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h > =================================================================== > --- flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h (Revision 576) > +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h (Arbeitskopie) > @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ > uint8_t (*chip_readb) (const chipaddr addr); > uint16_t (*chip_readw) (const chipaddr addr); > uint32_t (*chip_readl) (const chipaddr addr); > + > + void (*delay) (int usecs); > }; > > extern const struct programmer_entry programmer_table[]; > @@ -118,6 +120,7 @@ > uint8_t chip_readb(const chipaddr addr); > uint16_t chip_readw(const chipaddr addr); > uint32_t chip_readl(const chipaddr addr); > +void programmer_delay(uint32_t usecs); Why uint32_t here and int above? > Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c > =================================================================== > --- flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c (Revision 576) > +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c (Arbeitskopie) > @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ > */ > /* FIXME: We assume spi_read_status_register will never fail. */ > while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) > - sleep(1); > + programmer_delay(1000000); I'd also make this 100 * 1000 as below, easier on the eyes. > return 0; > } > > @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ > */ > /* FIXME: We assume spi_read_status_register will never fail. */ > while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) > - sleep(1); > + programmer_delay(1000000); Ditto. > return 0; > } > > @@ -485,7 +485,7 @@ > * This usually takes 100-4000 ms, so wait in 100 ms steps. > */ > while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) > - usleep(100 * 1000); > + programmer_delay(100 * 1000); > return 0; > } > Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c > =================================================================== > --- flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c (Revision 576) > +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c (Arbeitskopie) > @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ > chip_writeb(0x55, bios + 0x2AA); > chip_writeb(0x30, bios + address); > > - sleep(2); > + programmer_delay(1000000 * 2); Maybe 2 * 1000 * 1000, same format as above. > Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c > =================================================================== > --- flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c (Revision 576) > +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c (Arbeitskopie) > @@ -195,6 +195,18 @@ > return *(volatile uint32_t *) addr; > } > > +void internal_delay(int usecs) > +{ > + /* If the delay is >1 s, use usleep because timing does not need to > + * be so precise. Hm, but why not use myusec_delay() always? Does it have drawbacks? > + */ > + if (usecs > 1000000) { > + usleep(usecs); > + } else { > + myusec_delay(usecs); > + } > +} Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
