From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 145F2C43219 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 15:26:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6BE12147A for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 15:26:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="Zxl47kHU" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D6BE12147A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tkos.co.il Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date: In-reply-to:Subject:To:From:References:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=OPqGIF/sDnQ52mWqFaNYxPmJ3uorV7cYMEs7tZl9biY=; b=Zxl47kHU6oTZ20m56WYtpI82vv h+WtQIPgBOgdo1jaklbvpjjW0kUYi7GjDvQmXThUvGFL0DT8t7x4QcwV32J7vZgcRkIZ7XKu8htEw z2oGpYLNFf3qEr1sGjrpHP5aZ71vc/2kktfFEOWr/rsx2tr8RAmXwCfDrXogZfP15dbkoIf1vJTcc 4wfjPV1KtP09eFy5yhMQQhC7pkpVn/YcQ5qSEmZi82e0ViU6pB090Uo0fDx+i0Vx/4+eXDt234PiY vGW6sA8fHeIQufyYNTp6HwYNF9CFswbNDV6UbgkMDpfnD6txz8bVJinNKnnZjtxwTNLyTzXaB/lVF ZvYf5/Cw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hLUdt-00053b-Kg; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 15:26:01 +0000 Received: from guitar.tcltek.co.il ([192.115.133.116] helo=mx.tkos.co.il) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hLUdp-00052h-Gt for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 15:25:59 +0000 Received: from tarshish (unknown [10.0.8.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.tkos.co.il (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C46B44005B; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:25:52 +0300 (IDT) References: <20190430093212.28425-1-alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> <20190430093212.28425-2-alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> <877ebbu3lz.fsf@tarshish> <20190430114702.GD11339@piout.net> <875zqvu1l3.fsf@tarshish> <20190430130544.GF11339@piout.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.0; emacs 26.1 From: Baruch Siach To: Alexandre Belloni Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] rtc: digicolor: set range In-reply-to: <20190430130544.GF11339@piout.net> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:25:52 +0300 Message-ID: <87y33rsef3.fsf@tarshish> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190430_082557_800592_AD826941 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.86 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Alexandre, On Tue, Apr 30 2019, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 30/04/2019 15:20:08+0300, Baruch Siach wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 30 2019, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> > On 30/04/2019 14:36:24+0300, Baruch Siach wrote: >> >> Hi Alexandre, >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 30 2019, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> >> >> >> > While the range of REFERENCE + TIME is actually 33 bits, the counter >> >> > itself (TIME) is a 32-bits seconds counter. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni >> >> > --- >> >> > drivers/rtc/rtc-digicolor.c | 1 + >> >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-digicolor.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-digicolor.c >> >> > index 5bb14c56bc9a..e6e16aaac254 100644 >> >> > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-digicolor.c >> >> > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-digicolor.c >> >> > @@ -206,6 +206,7 @@ static int __init dc_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, rtc); >> >> > >> >> > rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &dc_rtc_ops; >> >> > + rtc->rtc_dev->range_max = U32_MAX; >> >> >> >> Where can I find documentation on the meaning and usage of the range_max >> >> value? I could not find anything in the kernel source. >> > >> > It should be set to the maximum UNIX timestamp the RTC can be set to >> > while keeping range_min to range_max contiguous. >> > >> > In the digicolor case, you could go up to 8589934590 (Wed Mar 16 >> > 12:56:30 UTC 2242) but the driver only writes DC_RTC_REFERENCE and I'm >> > not sure it can also update DC_RTC_TIME safely. >> >> DC_RTC_TIME resets to zero whenever dc_rtc_write writes CMD_RESET to the >> DC_RTC_CONTROL register. DC_RTC_REFERENCE keeps the value that >> dc_rtc_write stores there. So the driver will return values larger than >> U32_MAX if you happen to cross this point in time between dc_rtc_write >> and dc_rtc_read. But you can't store a value larger than U32_MAX in >> DC_RTC_REFERENCE. >> >> Will the core RTC code handle the U32_MAX cross correctly? > > Yes, this is ok to return a valid value that is higher than range_max. > However, at that time, you will not be able to set any alarms anymore as > the core doesn't allow to set alarms after range_max. > > I would think that this is fine because this will happen in 2106 and we > have a way to offset the time (the whole goal of setting the range) > using device tree. That's the sort of documentation that I'm missing. The 'start-year' property is mentioned in the DT binding documentation. But I don't see where range_max is documented as a facility for the time offset feature. Anyway, Acked-by: Baruch Siach Thanks, baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il - _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel