View Single Post
Old 07-31-2018, 11:47 PM   #3
DNSB
Bibliophagist
DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DNSB ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DNSB's Avatar
 
Posts: 47,793
Karma: 172313956
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Device: Kobo Sage, Libra Colour, Lenovo M8 FHD, Paperwhite 4, Tolino epos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derf View Post
bump.... any ideas on if this will work?
As far as I can see, there should be no problems with your changes. The only potential issue I seem to recall was that the timer used a single byte so 255 minutes was the longest time that could be set. Since you are actually reducing the times, it shouldn't be an issue.

Spent a couple of minutes and found this post from GeoffR but it's about 3 years old.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffR View Post
The code that the `Custom Sleep/Power-off timeouts` patch changes can only use values from 0-255. Although the register used to hold the timeout value is 32-bit and can hold much larger values, the code uses a 16-bit 'thumb' instruction to load the register, and there isn't room to use a wider instruction in the patch. It could be that the timeout function can accept larger values, but there is no way to load those larger values without re-writing the code.

Last edited by DNSB; 07-31-2018 at 11:56 PM. Reason: Added source quote
DNSB is offline   Reply With Quote