From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762444AbYBBNvA (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:51:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757224AbYBBNuy (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:50:54 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:51224 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753597AbYBBNux (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:50:53 -0500 Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 14:50:37 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Pavel Machek Cc: David Brownell , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, kernel list Subject: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test Message-ID: <20080202135037.GC925@elte.hu> References: <20080130131748.GA3796@elf.ucw.cz> <200801311755.33899.david-b@pacbell.net> <20080202124759.GB25773@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080202124759.GB25773@elf.ucw.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Pavel Machek wrote: > > Plus, the way you're doing it now is violating the locking protocol > > used by that driver. > > Yep, you are right, but that is the easy issue to fix. There's hard > issue: I need > > struct rtc_device *rtc > > for the rtc that can be used for system resume, and I'd like to get it > without violating too many layers. How to do that? > > Ideally, I need > > set_alarm(int) > > ...that will magically pick the right rtc device to talk to, and set > alarm on it. I don't see how to implement it with current code. i'd really love to have a /dev/rtc device compatibility APIs, both inside and outside the kernel. I really dont know why the new RTC code does not do it - why does it put up artificial anti-adoption barriers to make it harder to migrate to the new code? Ingo