From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: "Tomáš Janoušek" <tomi@nomi.cz>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@towertech.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc-dev: stop periodic interrupts on device release
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:05:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807281505.37122.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080728204136.GA6683@nomi.cz>
On Monday 28 July 2008, Tomáš Janoušek wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 01:50:55PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > Hmm, I'd think that something like an rtc_dev_ioctl(PIE_OFF) would be
Typo, by the way ... I meant UIE_OFF.
> > preferable here ... so that it's not just UIE_EMUL logic which turns
> > off the one-per-second update IRQs.
>
> I think it'd be more consistent if the framework only called the rtc api
> functions.
When they exist, sure. But they currently don't, and I see no value
in adding them just to avoid a simple rtc_dev_ioctl(UIE_OFF) call.
It'd be different if any in-kernel code used update IRQs ... NTP sync?
(Regardless, that's a separate bug and appropriate for a different patch.)
> Like: if the driver doesn't export an op for it and handles it in
> the ioctl op, it itself should be responsible to clear the irq in its release
> op. (I know there's no op for UIE, so we'd better add it instead of calling
> ioctl in the framework's release function.)
I still think the *existence* of a release() op is a problem. It's
requiring the drivers to maintain history they should never need.
Surely you agree that having the framework shut down only *emulated*
update IRQs, not "real" ones, is inconsistent? And hence undesirable?
- Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-28 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-26 15:46 [PATCH] rtc-dev: stop periodic interrupts on device release Tomas Janousek
2008-07-26 17:55 ` Alessandro Zummo
2008-07-26 18:06 ` Tomáš Janoušek
2008-07-26 18:13 ` Alessandro Zummo
2008-07-26 19:58 ` David Brownell
2008-07-26 20:50 ` David Brownell
2008-07-27 3:03 ` Mike Frysinger
2008-07-27 5:03 ` David Brownell
2008-07-28 20:41 ` Tomáš Janoušek
2008-07-28 20:47 ` Alessandro Zummo
2008-07-28 22:05 ` David Brownell [this message]
2008-07-28 23:36 ` Tomáš Janoušek
2008-07-29 20:08 ` David Brownell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807281505.37122.david-b@pacbell.net \
--to=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=alessandro.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tomi@nomi.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.