From: "Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>
To: "Johnny.Fan" <johnny.fan@cixtech.com>,
"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Feng Tang" <feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com>,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cix-kernel-upstream@cixtech.com, bob.zhang@cixtech.com,
jie.fu@cixtech.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rtc: efi: restore alarm support with runtime capability probe
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 15:34:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b12dffdb-b8d9-4438-bc17-00127c3a1bba@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260831113858.759210-1-johnny.fan@cixtech.com>
On Mon, 31 Aug 2026, at 13:38, Johnny.Fan wrote:
> From: "Johnny.Fan" <Johnny.Fan@cixtech.com>
>
> Restore the EFI RTC alarm functionality (read_alarm/set_alarm and
> procfs output) that was removed by commit 18a3510bc87d ("rtc: efi:
> Remove wakeup functionality").
>
> The removal was motivated by the observation that many EFI platforms
> lack RTC wakeup support while also omitting the RT_PROP table, causing
> the wakeup capability to be incorrectly advertised. While that is
> true, removing the feature entirely also breaks platforms where the
> wakeup runtime service actually works.
>
> On CIX SoCs, the RTC is an I2C device owned by firmware, and in the
> ACPI boot configuration the I2C bus it sits on is not exposed to the
> OS, so the EFI runtime services are the only way Linux can access
> the RTC at all. Both Linux and Windows use this same interface by
> design, so the RTC state is consistent across the operating systems
> installed on the machine, and Windows relies on the EFI wakeup
> services for its own RTC alarm support.
>
> With the alarm support removed from rtc-efi, Linux loses the
> equivalent capability entirely on these platforms: rtcwake fails
> for both suspend-to-RAM and power-off wakeup, as there is no other
> path to program the RTC alarm. This is a real product requirement
> that CIX customers have explicitly requested, not a hypothetical
> use case.
>
> To avoid exposing a broken alarm on firmware that does not implement
> the wakeup runtime services, probe the capability at ->probe() time by
> actually calling GetWakeupTime() -- if it fails, clear RTC_FEATURE_ALARM
> and the device behaves as before the removal.
>
> Also set RTC_FEATURE_ALARM_WAKEUP_ONLY since EFI wakeup time is a
> wakeup-only alarm, not a periodic/update interrupt source.
>
> Reviewed-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com>
> Reviewed-by: Fugang Duan <fugang.duan@cixtech.com>
> Tested-by: Johnny.Fan <Johnny.Fan@cixtech.com>
Please drop this tested-by - it is implied.
With that fixed, and the tweak below,
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Johnny.Fan <Johnny.Fan@cixtech.com>
> ---
> v2:
> - Expand the commit message with the actual product motivation,
> as requested by Ard.
> - Zero-initialize efi_time_t in convert_to_efi_time() to avoid
> leaking stack garbage in pad1/pad2 fields to firmware.
> - Zero-initialize the local eft in efi_read_alarm() so that
> convert_from_efi_time() does not fail with -EIO on disabled
> alarms, where the returned time is undefined per the UEFI spec.
> - Normalize wkalrm->enabled to a strict boolean (!!) before
> passing it to SetWakeupTime, as UEFI BOOLEAN must be 0 or 1.
> - Use %d for the signed alm.timezone value in procfs output.
>
> drivers/rtc/rtc-efi.c | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-efi.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-efi.c
> index b4f44999ef0f..5276870b410e 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-efi.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-efi.c
> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ compute_wday(efi_time_t *eft, int yday)
> static void
> convert_to_efi_time(struct rtc_time *wtime, efi_time_t *eft)
> {
> + memset(eft, 0, sizeof(*eft));
> eft->year = wtime->tm_year + 1900;
> eft->month = wtime->tm_mon + 1;
> eft->day = wtime->tm_mday;
> @@ -112,6 +113,35 @@ convert_from_efi_time(efi_time_t *eft, struct
> rtc_time *wtime)
> return true;
> }
>
> +static int efi_read_alarm(struct device *dev, struct rtc_wkalrm
> *wkalrm)
> +{
> + efi_time_t eft;
> + efi_status_t status;
> +
> + memset(&eft, 0, sizeof(eft));
> + status = efi.get_wakeup_time((efi_bool_t *)&wkalrm->enabled,
> + (efi_bool_t *)&wkalrm->pending, &eft);
> + if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (!convert_from_efi_time(&eft, &wkalrm->time))
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + return rtc_valid_tm(&wkalrm->time);
> +}
> +
> +static int efi_set_alarm(struct device *dev, struct rtc_wkalrm *wkalrm)
> +{
> + efi_time_t eft;
> + efi_status_t status;
> +
> + convert_to_efi_time(&wkalrm->time, &eft);
> +
> + status = efi.set_wakeup_time((efi_bool_t)!!wkalrm->enabled, &eft);
> +
> + return status == EFI_SUCCESS ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> static int efi_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> efi_status_t status;
> @@ -146,13 +176,21 @@ static int efi_set_time(struct device *dev,
> struct rtc_time *tm)
>
> static int efi_procfs(struct device *dev, struct seq_file *seq)
> {
> - efi_time_t eft;
> + efi_time_t eft, alm;
> efi_time_cap_t cap;
> + efi_bool_t enabled, pending;
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> memset(&eft, 0, sizeof(eft));
> + memset(&alm, 0, sizeof(alm));
> memset(&cap, 0, sizeof(cap));
>
> efi.get_time(&eft, &cap);
> + if (test_bit(RTC_FEATURE_ALARM, rtc->features) &&
> + efi.get_wakeup_time(&enabled, &pending, &alm) != EFI_SUCCESS) {
> + enabled = false;
> + pending = false;
Assign 0 here not false - efi_bool_t is a u8.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-31 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-28 3:15 [PATCH] rtc: efi: restore alarm support with runtime capability probe Johnny.Fan
2026-08-28 3:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-28 7:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2026-08-28 8:23 ` Johnny Fan
2026-08-28 8:32 ` Johnny Fan
2026-08-28 10:13 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2026-08-28 12:48 ` Alexandre Belloni
2026-08-31 1:10 ` Feng Tang
2026-08-31 11:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Johnny.Fan
2026-08-31 11:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-31 13:34 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2026-08-31 14:00 ` [PATCH v3] " Johnny.Fan
2026-08-31 17:47 ` sashiko-bot
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=b12dffdb-b8d9-4438-bc17-00127c3a1bba@app.fastmail.com \
--to=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=bob.zhang@cixtech.com \
--cc=cix-kernel-upstream@cixtech.com \
--cc=feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=jie.fu@cixtech.com \
--cc=johnny.fan@cixtech.com \
--cc=linux-efi@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