From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com (Alexandre Belloni)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 05:41:07 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 0/6] rtc: generic: follow up for COMPILE_TEST
In-Reply-To: <1456851608-3374907-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de>
References: <1456851608-3374907-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de>
Message-ID: <20160310044107.GD9868@piout.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi,

On 01/03/2016 at 17:59:56 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> Today's linux-next kernel allowed building the rtc-generic
> driver (and most other rtc drivers) on all architectures,
> but this caused some errors on architectures without asm/rtc.h.
> 
> This series reworks that driver to avoid the dependency,
> and simplifies all four implementations. My first approach
> was to split the driver into four separate drivers, but
> that didn't feel right when three of them have their own
> multiplexors.
> 
> The first five patches can be applied independent of one other,
> while patch 6 is optional and can be applied when all others
> are merged. Alternatively, they can all go in through the
> rtc tree. I compile-tested only the powerpc and sh targets for
> which I happened to have cross-compilers installed.
> 

I like this approach. Maybe you can also remove the now unnecessary
definitions from the various asm/rtc.h.

I have a small nitpick on the parisc patch.

I'll take the first patch, no need to resend that one.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com