From: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@freescale.com>
To: olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson)
Cc: trini@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
david-b@pacbell.net, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic RTC support for PPC
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 13:25:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070130132527.0ee3e9ea.kim.phillips@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070130160340.GA25443@lixom.net>
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:03:40 -0600
olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 12:37:12AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 29, 2007, at 11:17 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >
> > >On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 01:37:54AM -0600, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > >
> > >>Make the PPC RTC functions use the generic RTC infrastructure if they
> > >>are not already defined (and an RTC is registered in the system).
> > >>
> > >>This should make it possible to remove the hideous direct access used
> > >>in some of the 83xx platforms.
> > >
> > >Now, I know I'm a bit late, and I've been quiet of late, but, um,
> > >why is
> > >there anything other than the RTC class stuff being used? I know
> > >drivers/char/genrtc.c isn't gone yet, but really, it should be in the
> > >process of being phased out. IMHO, it should depend on !POWERPC (or
> > >whatever the magic is to allow arch/ppc && !arch/powerpc).
> >
> > I think the problem was calling the RTC class code from the place's
> > we use rtc in ppc had locking issues or something like that.
>
> Yes, and it does a direct call into the driver instead of using the
> subsystem, exporting the symbol from the driver. Not a very pretty
> solution but it's possible that the genrtc stuff wasn't available when
> it was first implemented.
>
that's probably true.
afaict, this powerpc platform <--> RTC class code glue is totally unnecessary; RTC class sets things up fine on 83xx based boards that have rtc chips supported in RTC class (e.g., the ITX). I'm referring to the third bullet point here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=116387226902131&w=2
For the MDS boards, which use the ds1374, I'd rather fix the problem properly and add a ds1374 driver to the RTC class. While Scott Wood (cc'd) has already done the port, I believe his patches are pending some patches by David Brownell.
Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-30 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-25 7:37 [PATCH] generic RTC support for PPC Olof Johansson
2007-01-30 5:17 ` Tom Rini
2007-01-30 6:37 ` Kumar Gala
2007-01-30 16:03 ` Olof Johansson
2007-01-30 18:53 ` Tom Rini
2007-01-30 19:25 ` Kim Phillips [this message]
2007-01-30 19:55 ` David Brownell
2007-02-06 11:08 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-02-06 14:40 ` Kumar Gala
2007-02-06 15:24 ` Olof Johansson
2007-02-06 16:16 ` Kumar Gala
2007-02-07 1:55 ` Kim Phillips
2007-02-06 15:16 ` Olof Johansson
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=20070130132527.0ee3e9ea.kim.phillips@freescale.com \
--to=kim.phillips@freescale.com \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=trini@kernel.crashing.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).