From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 902 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2003 18:09:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 895 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2003 18:09:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net) (194.217.242.92) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2003 18:09:14 -0000 Received: from calivar.demon.co.uk ([212.228.213.211] helo=xl5.calivar.com) by anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18dwe8-000FSI-0Y; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:09:12 +0000 Received: from balti.calivar.com (balti.calivar.com [10.0.0.102]) by xl5.calivar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B810A14848; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:16:18 +0000 (GMT) To: Fabrice Gautier Cc: 'Jonathan Larmour' , 'Gary Thomas' , "Ecos-List (E-mail)" References: <9F77D654ED40B74CA79E5A60B97A087B0423EC@sd-exchange.sdesigns.com> From: Nick Garnett Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <9F77D654ED40B74CA79E5A60B97A087B0423EC@sd-exchange.sdesigns.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [ECOS] HAL macros and RTC X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2 Fabrice Gautier writes: > > I dont know if the "on core timer" is always plugged into the same IRQ line > for MIPS or PPC, It is, it's part of the architecture definition. > but thats not the case for me. I think we should have in > the guide: > > "You only have to calculate and enter the proper CYGNUM_HAL_RTC_CONSTANTS > definitions in the platform CDL file and define CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_RTC in > [some include file]" Good point, I'll take a look at doing that. > > By the way shouldnt the interrupt be a CDL option like the other RTC related > constants ? Not really. The interrupt used is fixed by the hardware of the timer, usually. If a particular platform provided several timers, and if the HAL implementor chose to allow a choice, then indeed this value might need to change along with the definitions of the HAL_CLOCK_*() macros. -- Nick Garnett - eCos Kernel Architect http://www.eCosCentric.com/ -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss