From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>, Roc He <hepeng@zidoo.tv>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, ????????? <jiang.liqin@geniatech.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 15:47:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <629b9ed0-7b2d-7c5c-20b8-17289a76f097@suse.de>
> Thanks. Did you read the RFC question in the cover letter as well and
> have any comments? Downstream has an rtc-base-year = <2014>; property
> that I had left out in this RFC and due to your ack not included in v2.
>
> Should we default to 2014 in the driver and add an optional base-year
> property once we encounter a diverging device, or should we make it
> required from the beginning? I did not spot any other rtc binding with
> such a property and would appreciate a clarification.
Hi Andreas
>From the perspective of the hardware, does it care what the base is?
A device using a different base will initially return the wrong
time. But once the correct time has been written back, it will be O.K.
This only becomes an issue if a device is used with different OSs,
which have different bases. Swapping back and forth between OSs then
becomes an issue.
KISS suggests not having a base in DT until it is actually
required. Since it is an additional property, it does not break
backwards compatibility when added.
Andrew
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 15:47:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <629b9ed0-7b2d-7c5c-20b8-17289a76f097@suse.de>
> Thanks. Did you read the RFC question in the cover letter as well and
> have any comments? Downstream has an rtc-base-year = <2014>; property
> that I had left out in this RFC and due to your ack not included in v2.
>
> Should we default to 2014 in the driver and add an optional base-year
> property once we encounter a diverging device, or should we make it
> required from the beginning? I did not spot any other rtc binding with
> such a property and would appreciate a clarification.
Hi Andreas
>From the perspective of the hardware, does it care what the base is?
A device using a different base will initially return the wrong
time. But once the correct time has been written back, it will be O.K.
This only becomes an issue if a device is used with different OSs,
which have different bases. Swapping back and forth between OSs then
becomes an issue.
KISS suggests not having a base in DT until it is actually
required. Since it is an additional property, it does not break
backwards compatibility when added.
Andrew
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew-g2DYL2Zd6BY@public.gmane.org>
To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
linux-rtc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Alessandro Zummo
<a.zummo-BfzFCNDTiLLj+vYz1yj4TQ@public.gmane.org>,
Roc He <hepeng-qoVzM6YEWSw@public.gmane.org>,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
????????? <jiang.liqin-31gW8twSeR21Z/+hSey0Gg@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 15:47:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <629b9ed0-7b2d-7c5c-20b8-17289a76f097-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
> Thanks. Did you read the RFC question in the cover letter as well and
> have any comments? Downstream has an rtc-base-year = <2014>; property
> that I had left out in this RFC and due to your ack not included in v2.
>
> Should we default to 2014 in the driver and add an optional base-year
> property once we encounter a diverging device, or should we make it
> required from the beginning? I did not spot any other rtc binding with
> such a property and would appreciate a clarification.
Hi Andreas
>From the perspective of the hardware, does it care what the base is?
A device using a different base will initially return the wrong
time. But once the correct time has been written back, it will be O.K.
This only becomes an issue if a device is used with different OSs,
which have different bases. Swapping back and forth between OSs then
becomes an issue.
KISS suggests not having a base in DT until it is actually
required. Since it is an additional property, it does not break
backwards compatibility when added.
Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-27 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-20 1:36 [RFC 0/3] arm64: Realtek RTD1295 RTC Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295 Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-23 0:29 ` Rob Herring
2017-08-23 0:29 ` Rob Herring
2017-08-27 10:41 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 10:41 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 10:41 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 13:47 ` Andrew Lunn [this message]
2017-08-27 13:47 ` Andrew Lunn
2017-08-27 13:47 ` Andrew Lunn
2017-08-27 17:26 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 17:26 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 19:07 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-27 19:07 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 2/3] " Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 8:32 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 8:32 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 21:10 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 21:10 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-23 1:18 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-23 1:18 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 15:40 ` Andrew Lunn
2017-08-20 15:40 ` Andrew Lunn
2017-08-20 21:12 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 21:12 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 3/3] arm64: dts: realtek: Add RTD1295 RTC node Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` Andreas Färber
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=20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch \
--to=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hepeng@zidoo.tv \
--cc=jiang.liqin@geniatech.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/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.