From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 16:16:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 16:16:41 -0400 Received: from 212.Red-80-35-44.pooles.rima-tde.net ([80.35.44.212]:33153 "EHLO DervishD.pleyades.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 16:16:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:18:51 +0200 Organization: Pleyades To: abraham@2d3d.co.za, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Changing the current RTC device interface Message-ID: <3CF3E62B.mail6AX1MQ2Z5@viadomus.com> In-Reply-To: <20020528162435.A4917@crystal.2d3d.co.za> User-Agent: nail 9.29 12/10/01 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: DervishD Reply-To: DervishD X-Mailer: DervishD TWiSTiNG Mailer Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Abraham :) >>Any objections / suggestions / comments about things that's wrong/right >>about the current RTC implementation? I think that, today at least, the nvram device is almost useless, since only a few bytes are common to all BIOS vendors. The best solution I can think about is just the same you propose: two devices, one for the processor builtin RTC (the TSC counter?) and another for the usual RTC on the motherboard. The only ugly thing I see is the NVRam driver, which I consider useless these days. Raśl