From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alessandro Zummo Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] Generic RTC class driver Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:03:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20090302110310.35af50ea@i1501.lan.towertech.it> References: <1235144809-32468-1-git-send-email-Geert.Uytterhoeven@sonycom.com> <20090220170454.04382e9e@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1235511327.18632.73.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20090224231154.60ba18d6@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1235514727.18632.93.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20090225111836.621412c1@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <20090227185514.GA1071@linux-m68k.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Richard Zidlicky , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, David Woodhouse , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Development , David@ozlabs.org, Kyle McMartin , Linux/PPC Development , Linux/m68k , Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Geert Uytterhoeven Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:54:14 +0100 (CET) Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Indeed. You can have a working RTC class driver for lots of hardware by just > writing ca. 100 lines of code on top of the generic framework. That's true, but we would then have two generic frameworks. And one of them will have its code scattered all around the kernel. So you either use the old rtc framework, which is perfectly functional, or you move to the new rtc lass and write the drivers. Layering a generic framework over another generic framework is quite a nonsense . -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy http://www.towertech.it