From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759370AbYG2UIt (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:08:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751969AbYG2UIk (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:08:40 -0400 Received: from smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.89]:27849 "HELO smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751906AbYG2UIk (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:08:40 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=nQ75WpprWo6RHtZROEq4hs+8Si2M9rhNaoVIvNTuIneHYcBe1dja2iJ+aHe/6SIE/xOovqSR22zrc2bUokm1YwlA4DVZmVJZTyZViisy0lqzBZ55b1sdhoaSsYhhp8wj5ynOSyg6s8uvXjU9q/j1RZrpKUEPZhgOWupwpbhAoi4= ; X-YMail-OSG: qRD8fdgVM1n2_3swOUtya1PeSOVDUUF15H9b6pWPKhQHGPX9KraAdVbedtU9CFovRXzmIe1x2ONNaHSD.fL4f_wYLP2Qk.gmEspqmYV7VQ-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: =?utf-8?q?Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1_Janou=C5=A1ek?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc-dev: stop periodic interrupts on device release Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:08:38 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alessandro Zummo References: <20080726154617.GA5613@notes.lisk.in> <200807281505.37122.david-b@pacbell.net> <20080728233638.GA10327@nomi.cz> In-Reply-To: <20080728233638.GA10327@nomi.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807291308.38134.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 28 July 2008, Tomáš Janoušek wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 03:05:36PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > Surely you agree that having the framework shut down only *emulated* > > update IRQs, not "real" ones, is inconsistent? And hence undesirable? > > The idea was that if the "real" ones get turned on using some ioctl magic the > framework has no exact control over, they shouldn't be shut down by it. But > yeah, your point of view looks fine as well. The /dev/rtcN support *is* part of the framework. ;) > So I guess I'll post the current patch to Andrew and then, someone (not me, > for time and competence reasons, sorry) can prepare a patch removing the > release op and changing the calls in framework's release to call > rtc_dev_ioctl. > > Is this ok? Yep. - Dave