
27 Mar
2014
27 Mar
'14
10:29 p.m.
On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 21:52 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
+static struct sunxi_timer *timer_base =
&((struct sunxi_timer_reg *)SUNXI_TIMER_BASE)->timer[TIMER_NUM];
+/* macro to read the 32 bit timer: since it decrements, we invert read value */ +#define READ_TIMER() (~readl(&timer_base->val))
This macro has to go, just use ~readl() in place. But still, why do you use that negation in "~readl()" anyway ?
The comment right above it explains why: the timer counts backwards and inverting it accounts for that.
This is subtle enough that I don't think using ~readl() in place in the 3 callers would be an improvement.
Ian.