From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To: Esteban Blanc <eblanc@baylibre.com>
Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com,
broonie@kernel.org, a.zummo@towertech.it,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, jpanis@baylibre.com,
jneanne@baylibre.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH INTERNAL v1 1/3] rtc: tps6594: add driver for TPS6594 PMIC RTC
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 12:01:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230313110158f5c27b63@mail.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CR556BV2M4I4.2L3LLJ8V1I352@burritosblues>
On 13/03/2023 10:18:45+0100, Esteban Blanc wrote:
> On Tue Mar 7, 2023 at 12:08 PM CET, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 24/02/2023 14:31:27+0100, Esteban Blanc wrote:
> > > +struct tps6594_rtc {
> > > + struct rtc_device *rtc;
> > > +};
> >
> > Is the struct actually useful?
>
> Good catch, it's not. I will remove it for V2.
>
> (...)
>
> > > +/*
> > > + * Gets current tps6594 RTC time and date parameters.
> > > + *
> > > + * The RTC's time/alarm representation is not what gmtime(3) requires
> > > + * Linux to use:
> > > + *
> > > + * - Months are 1..12 vs Linux 0-11
> > > + * - Years are 0..99 vs Linux 1900..N (we assume 21st century)
> > > + */
> >
> > I don't find this comment to be particularly useful.
>
> Ok. I propose that I add 2 constants for the -1 and +100 in the month and year
> calculation. This way, without the comment the computation would be a
> bit more self explanatory.
> What do you think?
I don't think this is necessary, keep -1 for the month and +100 for the
year, those are very common operations in the subsystem and don't really
need any explanation
>
> (...)
>
> > > +static int tps6594_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct tps6594 *tps6594;
> > > + struct tps6594_rtc *tps_rtc;
> > > + int irq;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + tps6594 = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> > > +
> > > + tps_rtc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct tps6594_rtc),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!tps_rtc)
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > + tps_rtc->rtc = devm_rtc_allocate_device(&pdev->dev);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(tps_rtc->rtc))
> > > + return PTR_ERR(tps_rtc->rtc);
> > > +
> > > + /* Enable crystal oscillator */
> > > + ret = regmap_set_bits(tps6594->regmap, TPS6594_REG_RTC_CTRL_2,
> > > + TPS6594_BIT_XTAL_EN);
> > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + /* Start rtc */
> > > + ret = regmap_set_bits(tps6594->regmap, TPS6594_REG_RTC_CTRL_1,
> > > + TPS6594_BIT_STOP_RTC);
> > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > + return ret;
> >
> > Do that (XTAL_EN and clearing STOP) only once the time is known to be
> > set to a correct value so read_time doesn't have a chance to return a
> > bogus value.
> >
>
> (...)
>
> I understand your point, however I'm not sure of the canonical way to do
> this. Simply calling `tps6594_rtc_set_time` is enough?
Yeah, let userspace set the time and start the rtc at that point.
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-13 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-24 13:31 [PATCH v1 0/3] TI TPS6594 PMIC support (RTC, pinctrl, regulators, device trees) Esteban Blanc
2023-02-24 13:31 ` [PATCH INTERNAL v1 1/3] rtc: tps6594: add driver for TPS6594 PMIC RTC Esteban Blanc
2023-03-07 11:08 ` Alexandre Belloni
2023-03-13 9:18 ` Esteban Blanc
2023-03-13 11:01 ` Alexandre Belloni [this message]
2023-03-13 12:10 ` Esteban Blanc
2023-03-13 13:38 ` Alexandre Belloni
2023-02-24 13:31 ` [PATCH INTERNAL v1 2/3] pinctrl: tps6594: add for TPS6594 PMIC Esteban Blanc
2023-02-24 18:49 ` kernel test robot
2023-02-25 20:36 ` kernel test robot
2023-03-06 14:10 ` Linus Walleij
2023-03-14 17:30 ` Esteban Blanc
2023-02-24 13:31 ` [PATCH INTERNAL v1 3/3] regulator: tps6594-regulator: Add driver for TI TPS6594 regulators Esteban Blanc
2023-02-24 13:42 ` Mark Brown
2023-03-03 15:02 ` jerome Neanne
2023-03-23 9:12 ` jerome Neanne
2023-03-23 11:38 ` Mark Brown
2023-03-24 8:00 ` jerome Neanne
2023-02-24 14:05 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-03 14:49 ` jerome Neanne
2023-02-24 22:06 ` kernel test robot
2023-03-22 9:10 ` Julien Panis
2023-03-22 13:13 ` Mark Brown
2023-03-22 13:40 ` Julien Panis
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=20230313110158f5c27b63@mail.local \
--to=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=eblanc@baylibre.com \
--cc=jneanne@baylibre.com \
--cc=jpanis@baylibre.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).