From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>, Roc He <hepeng@zidoo.tv>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, ????????? <jiang.liqin@geniatech.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 15:47:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <629b9ed0-7b2d-7c5c-20b8-17289a76f097@suse.de>
> Thanks. Did you read the RFC question in the cover letter as well and
> have any comments? Downstream has an rtc-base-year = <2014>; property
> that I had left out in this RFC and due to your ack not included in v2.
>
> Should we default to 2014 in the driver and add an optional base-year
> property once we encounter a diverging device, or should we make it
> required from the beginning? I did not spot any other rtc binding with
> such a property and would appreciate a clarification.
Hi Andreas
>From the perspective of the hardware, does it care what the base is?
A device using a different base will initially return the wrong
time. But once the correct time has been written back, it will be O.K.
This only becomes an issue if a device is used with different OSs,
which have different bases. Swapping back and forth between OSs then
becomes an issue.
KISS suggests not having a base in DT until it is actually
required. Since it is an additional property, it does not break
backwards compatibility when added.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-27 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-20 1:36 [RFC 0/3] arm64: Realtek RTD1295 RTC Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Realtek RTD1295 Andreas Färber
2017-08-23 0:29 ` Rob Herring
2017-08-27 10:41 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 13:47 ` Andrew Lunn [this message]
2017-08-27 17:26 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-27 19:07 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 2/3] " Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 8:32 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 21:10 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-23 1:18 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-08-20 15:40 ` Andrew Lunn
2017-08-20 21:12 ` Andreas Färber
2017-08-20 1:36 ` [RFC 3/3] arm64: dts: realtek: Add RTD1295 RTC node Andreas Färber
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=20170827134729.GE13622@lunn.ch \
--to=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hepeng@zidoo.tv \
--cc=jiang.liqin@geniatech.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.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