From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (fed1rmmtao12.cox.net [68.230.241.27]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8472167A72 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 05:13:32 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:13:30 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Dan Malek Message-ID: <20050118181330.GJ28724@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <41EC29A8.1040703@mvista.com> <20050118161515.GI28724@smtp.west.cox.net> <93780AB0-696D-11D9-81BE-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <93780AB0-696D-11D9-81BE-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Option to disable mapping genrtc calls to ppc_md calls List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:25:33AM -0500, Dan Malek wrote: > > On Jan 18, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > >On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:10:00PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote: > > >>There are 2 reasons to not use the ppc_md.get_rtc_time() et. al. > >>interfaces: > >>1) They are called before the i2c driver is initialized and even > >>loaded > >>if its a module. > > There are three reasons. You don't want to use an I2c rtc clock at > all in these functions because they get can get called from the > clock interrupt to update the time in the rtc. If it does happen to > work, > it creates long latencies in the timer interrupt. If the i2c requires > an > interrupt, they system will crash or hang. I think one of us wasn't clear. I'm not arguing for nuking ppc_md.{get,set}_rtc_time(), I'm arguing for nuking get_rtc_time()/set_rtc_time() inlines from (which are used by drivers/char/genrtc.c) in favor of todc_time et al providing the functions for genrtc. So all of the other places we use ppc_md.{get,set}_rtc_time() are unchanged. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/