From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755673Ab3AVTuC (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:50:02 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.220.54]:53081 "EHLO mail-pa0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753876Ab3AVTuB (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:50:01 -0500 Message-ID: <50FEED65.6050107@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:49:57 -0800 From: John Stultz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: Feng Tang , Thomas Gleixner , Alessandro Zummo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] timekeeping: Add CONFIG_HAS_PERSISTENT_CLOCK option References: <1358266189-8812-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <1358266189-8812-3-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <50F5B2FA.6030006@linaro.org> <20130122194433.GG30647@obsidianresearch.com> In-Reply-To: <20130122194433.GG30647@obsidianresearch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/22/2013 11:44 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:50:18AM -0800, John Stultz wrote: >> On 01/15/2013 08:09 AM, Feng Tang wrote: >>> Make the persistent clock check a kernel config option, so that some >>> platform can explicitely select it, also make CONFIG_RTC_HCTOSYS depends >>> on its non-existence, which could prevent the persistent clock and RTC >>> code from doing similar thing twice during system's init/suspend/resume >>> phases. >>> >>> If the CONFIG_HAS_PERSISTENT_CLOCK=n, then no change happens for kernel >>> which still does the persistent clock check in timekeeping_init(). >>> >>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner >>> Suggested-by: John Stultz >>> Signed-off-by: Feng Tang >> Applied. I also added a dependency for Jason's CONFIG_RTC_SYSTOHC. > Sort of an ugly config name, since I gather ARM should always set this > to 'n'... > > CONFIG_USE_ONLY_PERSISTENT_CLOCK ? (Sigh. I got this seemingly microseconds after I sent the pull request :) So yea, fair point, there could be some confusion. But ONLY_PERSISTENT_CLOCK isn't quite right either, more like CONFIG_HAS_PERSISTENT_CLOCK_ALWAYS or something. Hrm. Let me think on it for a bit, and feel free to suggest further improvements. thanks -john