From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:55:55 -0700
Subject: [RFC/PATCH 00/11] arm: omap: counter32k rework
In-Reply-To: <560DAFC5.50003@linaro.org>
References: <1443559446-26969-1-git-send-email-balbi@ti.com>
 <20150930141338.GC31865@saruman.tx.rr.com>
 <3705422.OMk7ysE7Jn@wuerfel> <6944324.e1oo8C9xbx@wuerfel>
 <560DAFC5.50003@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <20151005105554.GV23801@atomide.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

* Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> [151001 15:16]:
> On 09/30/2015 04:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >On Wednesday 30 September 2015 16:42:21 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >>TEGRA folks: the tegra_read_persistent_clock() implementation apparently
> >>predates the Tegra RTC driver and I wonder if they actually do the
> >>right thing in combination. Could it be that the wall time forwards
> >>twice as fast as it should during resume when the RTC driver is loaded?
> >>Could it be that we can simply remove  tegra_read_persistent_clock()
> >>and the register_persistent_clock() infrastructure?
> >>
> >
> >I found the 'sleeptime_injected' variable now, which takes care of
> >forwarding the clock by the correct amount.
> >
> >I also found the CLOCK_SOURCE_SUSPEND_NONSTOP flag next to it, which
> >should let us use the counter32k driver to provide the correct
> >time during suspend without the omap_read_persistent_clock() function.
> >We should be able to just delete that code.
> >
> >If we decide to also delete the tegra_read_persistent_clock()
> >function, we can remove the registration too.
> 
> 
> +1

We could maybe have read_persistent_clock() just check for the
CLOCK_SOURCE_SUSPEND_NONSTOP flag?

And we probably should have also has_persistent_clock() or something
that also checks for the CLOCK_SOURCE_SUSPEND_NONSTOP.

Regards,

Tony