[PATCH 2/2] ARM: delay: allow timer-based delay implementation to be selected

[Will Deacon]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:07:35AM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 06/26/12 03:49, Will Deacon wrote:
> > I suppose I could allow the function to fail if it's called after we've
> > calibrated. What do you reckon?
> >
> 
> Fair enough. Would anything actually go wrong if you called it twice? I
> would think everything would be assigned to what it already is but I
> haven't thought deeply about it. I don't really care to make the
> function more complicated for a case that should never happen.

If it's called once before calibration and again after calibration then that
could cause problems if a different frequency is passed. However, I think we
can probably leave the function as-is until we have the capacity to support
multiple read_current_timer implementations in the same kernel. At that
point, we'd probably have a way to register the current_timer which could
also setup the delay loop.

Will