From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:21:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:40613 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20023252AbXFRPVt (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:21:49 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5IFENq0005206; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:14:29 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l5IFENBl005205; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:14:23 +0100 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:14:22 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Franck Bui-Huu Cc: Atsushi Nemoto , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Implement clockevents for R4000-style cp0 timer Message-ID: <20070618151422.GA4864@linux-mips.org> References: <11818164011355-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <11818164024053-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <20070614.212913.82089068.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp> <20070617000448.GA30807@linux-mips.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 15449 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:22:39PM +0200, Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > were an interface for _generic_ rtc only. But all the following > platforms don't seem to use the generic rtc though it initialises > these function pointers... Any idea why ? Because unless drivers/char/Kconfig is getting changed to prevent that is is possible to enable CONFIG_GEN_RTC, so this code was necessary for correctness. Aside I think it did simply propagate through cutnpaste. That at least was the reason in the 2.4 days when the old kernel configuration language made it way to painful to deal with such configurations. These days I think we should rather get rid of genrtc. Genrtc used to be nice candy but like most sweets long term it results in caries ;-) Ralf