From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Gabriel Paubert <paubert@iram.es>
Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>, Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: set_rtc_time() cleanup / normalization
Date: 15 May 2003 21:37:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1053027458.2978.60.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030515184412.GA22327@iram.es>
On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 20:44, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> Hmm, in this case. My current plan is to implement the documented
> behaviour, whatever it takes (time, among other things), since
> I am deeply convinced that it is the correct behaviour.
>
> So far, all the arguments that I've seen in favor of removing
> thos code boil down to the fact that developers are too lazy
> to implement it correctly.
Ok, so here are my concerns, if you can address them cleanly, I'm
ok with that ;)
I want things like PMU or Cuda based RTC (or i2c based one) to
be able to schedule in get/set_rtc_time(), thus those shouldn't be
called at interrupt time. Maybe a flag "rtc_irq_safe" in ppc_md that
when clear would cause you to defer processing to a work queue ? Or
maybe we can simply unconditionally defer ?
We need also to move the initial reading of the RTC a bit later
in the boot process, I'm not too sure what would happen if we
schedule that early, and we may want to wait for things like i2c
to be available.
Ben.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-15 19:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-12 21:17 set_rtc_time() cleanup / normalization Wolfgang Denk
2003-05-13 0:16 ` Dan Malek
2003-05-13 7:52 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2003-05-13 8:18 ` Gabriel Paubert
[not found] ` <Pine.GSO.4.21.0305131051420.20323-100000@vervain.sonytel.be>
2003-05-13 10:21 ` Gabriel Paubert
2003-05-13 13:35 ` Wolfgang Denk
2003-05-13 12:03 ` Richard Zidlicky
2003-05-13 23:05 ` Paul Mackerras
2003-05-13 23:33 ` Eugene Surovegin
2003-05-14 0:08 ` Wolfgang Denk
[not found] ` <5.1.0.14.2.20030513171616.037f6800@mail.ebshome.net>
2003-05-14 3:47 ` Matt Porter
[not found] ` <5.1.0.14.2.20030513214040.02a6e6d0@mail.ebshome.net>
[not found] ` <3EC1DB1F.8000408@embeddededge.com>
2003-05-14 6:41 ` Eugene Surovegin
2003-05-14 6:47 ` Wolfgang Denk
2003-05-14 8:32 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-05-14 15:57 ` Gabriel Paubert
2003-05-14 16:41 ` Eugene Surovegin
2003-05-14 15:50 ` Gabriel Paubert
2003-05-14 15:43 ` Gabriel Paubert
2003-05-14 16:28 ` Dan Malek
2003-05-15 18:04 ` Gabriel Paubert
2003-05-15 18:21 ` Wolfgang Denk
[not found] ` <20030515184412.GA22327@iram.es>
2003-05-15 19:37 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
[not found] <20030514230638.GB1687@linux-m68k.org>
[not found] ` <Pine.GSO.4.21.0305151031410.13683-100000@vervain.sonytel.be>
2003-05-15 10:45 ` Gabriel Paubert
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=1053027458.2978.60.camel@gaston \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dan@embeddededge.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=paubert@iram.es \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
/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).