On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 21:59 -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On 5 July 2017 at 11:44, Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Timeout in some abstract ticks is not what we are applying to get > > deterministic behaviour. > > A tick is always milliseconds in U-Boot, as I understand it.
You see, there is a confusion. I would like to see units somewhere there, to make it clear. > > > > > Convert name to show explicitly that we are using microseconds (for > > watchdog it's more than precise). > > Do you want microseconds, or is milliseconds enough accuracy? I have a > hard time imagining a case where a microsecond watchdog timeout is > useful. For me ticks sounded like processor cycles (nanosecond-ish). So, milliseconds are better. Since I have not much time, feel free to drop, modify, etc. Thanks for review. > > > > > No functional change intended. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/watchdog/wdt-uclass.c | 4 ++-- > > include/wdt.h | 8 ++++---- > > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > Regards, > Simon -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot