[PATCH] rtc/r9701: avoid second call to the rtc_valid_tm

[PATCH] rtc/r9701: avoid second call to the rtc_valid_tm

[Devendra Naga]

r9701_get_datetime will call the rtc_valid_tm and it returns the
value returned by rtc_valid_tm, which anyway can be used in the if

so calling rtc_valid_tm is not required.

Signed-off-by: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@gmail.com>
---


This change is compiled tested only using gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) 4.6.3 on x86_64 (intel core i3).

 drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c |    3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
index 33b6ba0..e6c34c0 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
@@ -138,8 +138,7 @@ static int __devinit r9701_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
 	 * contain invalid values. If so, try to write a default date:
 	 * 2000/1/1 00:00:00
 	 */
-	r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt);
-	if (rtc_valid_tm(&dt)) {
+	if (r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
 		dev_info(&spi->dev, "trying to repair invalid date/time\n");
 		dt.tm_sec  = 0;
 		dt.tm_min  = 0;
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH] rtc/r9701: avoid second call to the rtc_valid_tm

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:34:40 +0530
Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@gmail.com> wrote:

> r9701_get_datetime will call the rtc_valid_tm and it returns the
> value returned by rtc_valid_tm, which anyway can be used in the if
> 
> so calling rtc_valid_tm is not required.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@gmail.com>
> ---
> 
> 
> This change is compiled tested only using gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) 4.6.3 on x86_64 (intel core i3).
> 
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c |    3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
> index 33b6ba0..e6c34c0 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
> @@ -138,8 +138,7 @@ static int __devinit r9701_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>  	 * contain invalid values. If so, try to write a default date:
>  	 * 2000/1/1 00:00:00
>  	 */
> -	r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt);
> -	if (rtc_valid_tm(&dt)) {
> +	if (r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
>  		dev_info(&spi->dev, "trying to repair invalid date/time\n");
>  		dt.tm_sec  = 0;
>  		dt.tm_min  = 0;

Looks OK.


I think the driver would be better if we were to do this:


From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c: check that r9701_set_datetime() succeeded

When the driver detects that the clock time is invalid, it attempts to
write a sane time into the hardware.  We curently assume that everything
is OK is those writes succeeded.  But it is better to re-read the time
from the hardware to ensure that the new settings got there OK.

Cc: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@gmail.com>
Cc: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>
Cc: Anatolij Gustschin <agust@denx.de>
Cc: Andreas Dumberger <andreas.dumberger@tqs.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---

 drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff -puN drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c~a drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c~a
+++ a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
@@ -147,7 +147,8 @@ static int __devinit r9701_probe(struct 
 		dt.tm_mon  = 0;
 		dt.tm_year = 100;
 
-		if (r9701_set_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
+		if (r9701_set_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt) ||
+				r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
 			dev_err(&spi->dev, "cannot repair RTC register\n");
 			return -ENODEV;
 		}
_


But I can't test this :(

Re: [PATCH] rtc/r9701: avoid second call to the rtc_valid_tm

[devendra.aaru]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks a lot for the reply. :-)

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:34:40 +0530
> Looks OK.
>
>
> I think the driver would be better if we were to do this:
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c: check that r9701_set_datetime() succeeded
>
> When the driver detects that the clock time is invalid, it attempts to
> write a sane time into the hardware.  We curently assume that everything
> is OK is those writes succeeded.  But it is better to re-read the time
> from the hardware to ensure that the new settings got there OK.
>
> Cc: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru@gmail.com>
> Cc: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>
> Cc: Anatolij Gustschin <agust@denx.de>
> Cc: Andreas Dumberger <andreas.dumberger@tqs.de>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c |    3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff -puN drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c~a drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c~a
> +++ a/drivers/rtc/rtc-r9701.c
> @@ -147,7 +147,8 @@ static int __devinit r9701_probe(struct
>                dt.tm_mon  = 0;
>                dt.tm_year = 100;
>
> -               if (r9701_set_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
> +               if (r9701_set_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt) ||
> +                               r9701_get_datetime(&spi->dev, &dt)) {
Yeah, agreed, crosschecking whether we have a valid time set at the
hardware by the r9701_set_datetime.

>                        dev_err(&spi->dev, "cannot repair RTC register\n");
>                        return -ENODEV;
>                }
> _
>
>
> But I can't test this :(

I also dont have the RTC-j9701 hardware :(.

i was thinking of cases like setting / getting of time from ioctl. but
there was no ioctl support inside the driver.

i am really a newbie in kernel, pardon me if i told anything wrong ...

Thanks,
Devendra.