Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> 2007/6/8, Gilles Chanteperdrix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > BOUIN Alexandre wrote:
> > >
> > > > When we released our last version of
> > adeos-ipipe-2.6.19-arm-AT91.patch, we suggested to merge code for
> > at91rm9200 and at91sam926x.
> > > > These 2 code are split but quite similar, so we think it could be a
> > good idea. Are you OK for removing duplicated code ?
> > If I have to choose between duplicating some Linux code in I-pipe code
> > and have some duplication in the I-pipe patch, I choose duplication in
> > the I-pipe patch. If you duplicate Linux code, you will have to avoid
> > forgetting to update this duplicate code when Linux code evolves.
> Well the first mail wasn't very clear. I am going to explain what we
> have in mind.
> In Linux code for AT91 timer there are two files: at91sam926x_time.c
> and at91rm9200_time.c because AT91RM9200 and AT91SAM926x have
> different system timer: AT91RM9200 use AT91_ST peripheral and
> AT91SAM926x use AT91_PIT peripheral.
I was somehow thinking that there was something else in at91xx_time.c
than what is enclosed in #ifdef CONFIG_IPIPE. I was wrong.
Now, I have another question: is there no way to use the AT91_PIT
peripheral in one shot mode ? What is the resolution of this PIT ?
In any case, please send a patch, this will make a real base for
Xenomai-core mailing list