From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix RTC_CLASS regression with PARISC Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:04:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080908.160441.124972717.davem@davemloft.net> References: <200809081429.57805.david-b@pacbell.net> <20080908.143504.121592746.davem@davemloft.net> <1220914847.8074.81.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: david-b@pacbell.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org To: James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1220914847.8074.81.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org From: James Bottomley Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:00:47 -0500 > On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 14:35 -0700, David Miller wrote: > > The RTC layer is very nice and it even allows writing drivers for > > very simplistic RTC devices (even ones that cannot be written) > > with ease. I had two such cases to handle on sparc64. > > I'm guessing they're not upstream yet (since I can't find them)? It's in my sparc next tree: master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/sparc-next-2.6.git > However, if you based them on rtc-ppc.c then yes, I agree, it looks > reasonably easy: it's just a matter of converting over the GEN_RTC > PDT_TOD helpers. That's not what I do, I use the real RAW chip drivers provided by the RTC layer. That's the way to do this. I think the powerpc folks did the wrong thing and should just register generic platform_device objects in their platform code, and let the RTC layer drive the individual devices in response. All the powerpc folks are doing is providing a dummy shim into the RTC layer using their machine description vector, and not really using the RTC layer drivers at all.