From: "Mark A. Greer" <mgreer@mvista.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Option to disable mapping genrtc calls to ppc_md calls
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:09:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41F04849.70506@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1106265672.5387.14.camel@gaston>
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 16:54 -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
>
>
>
>>Choosing a) give you more flexibility within PPC but is PPC only;
>>choosing b) is generic but assumes its the only rtc chip that will be
>>used by whatever kernel binary its put in.
>>
>>I chose b) and to reuse the genrtc code. In a sane world, reusing code
>>is considered a good thing...
>>
>>Its obvious that you and Tom prefer a). That's fine but if I switch to
>>a), I know the first comment I'll get when I post the driver to lmkl
>>will be, "Why would you make this ppc-specific when you could have made
>>it generic?" Will you and Tom then defend that decision for me?
>>
>>Also, this is not board-specific as you and Tom have tried to suggest.
>>Assuming I change the #ifdef in rtc.h to remove the option as I think
>>Tom and I are agreeing upon, you select the i2c algo/adapter, the
>>i2c/rtc client and its there. Where are the "gross hacks for every board"?
>>
>>
>
>Because it makes things like CONFIG_PPC_MULTIPLATFORM impossible, which
>means you end up with a CONFIG_* mess.
>
/me feels the anger... :)
>
>I consider that more important than re-using code.
>
Okay, it shall be so.
>
>In any case, as I wrote, the proper solution is to update genrtc to
>define rtc_ops so that you get both a) and b), it shouldn't be hard to
>update the archs using it.
>
>
Yes but as I wrote, I don't have time right now.
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-21 0:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-17 21:10 [RFC] Option to disable mapping genrtc calls to ppc_md calls Mark A. Greer
2005-01-18 9:20 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2005-01-18 18:40 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-18 19:01 ` Eugene Surovegin
2005-01-18 16:15 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-18 16:25 ` Dan Malek
2005-01-18 17:39 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-01-18 18:33 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-18 18:13 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-18 18:58 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-18 19:08 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-18 19:43 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-19 18:08 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-20 20:52 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-20 22:53 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-20 23:21 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-20 23:47 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-20 23:56 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-18 18:54 ` Eugene Surovegin
2005-01-20 22:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-01-18 18:55 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-18 19:05 ` Tom Rini
2005-01-18 19:33 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-20 22:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-01-20 23:54 ` Mark A. Greer
2005-01-21 0:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-01-21 0:09 ` Mark A. Greer [this message]
2005-01-21 0:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-01-21 9:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2005-01-21 14:39 ` Corey Minyard
2005-01-21 22:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-01-21 9:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=41F04849.70506@mvista.com \
--to=mgreer@mvista.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.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).