On April 9, 2015 7:10:55 AM CDT, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
>
>On 09/04/15 14:05, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> With the nanoseconds extensions this would simply not work.
>
>Sorry, I had this primitive ERC32 timer module in mind. In terms of
>tickless operation there are not differences between the
On 09/04/15 14:05, Sebastian Huber wrote:
With the nanoseconds extensions this would simply not work.
Sorry, I had this primitive ERC32 timer module in mind. In terms of
tickless operation there are not differences between the nanoseconds
extension and the timercounters. Both depend on the
On 09/04/15 14:00, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On April 9, 2015 4:11:14 AM CDT, Alexander
Krutwig wrote:
>Hello,
>
>the newest Timecounter patch was sent yesterday. As of now, the
>replacement of the nanoseconds extension with FreeBSD timecounters will
>
>also be started for the remaining BSPs. Exe
On April 9, 2015 4:11:14 AM CDT, Alexander Krutwig
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>the newest Timecounter patch was sent yesterday. As of now, the
>replacement of the nanoseconds extension with FreeBSD timecounters will
>
>also be started for the remaining BSPs. Exemplarily, the changes for
>the
>ERC32-BSP
Hello,
the newest Timecounter patch was sent yesterday. As of now, the
replacement of the nanoseconds extension with FreeBSD timecounters will
also be started for the remaining BSPs. Exemplarily, the changes for the
ERC32-BSP are given in the patch.
Best regards,
Alexander Krutwig
--
--
