Since some kernel version it is impossible to select the Enhanced Real
Time Clock Support (legacy PC RTC driver) because RTC_LIB is set by
default in arch/x86/Kconfig, but the rule for selecting CONFIG_RTC is
RTC_LIB=n. So the code of driver/char/rtc is still useless.
This breaks the API since there is no more misc device /dev/rtc
available without a udev rule or a link to /dev/rtc0.
[adding more patch committers]
On 04/13/2014 12:05 PM, Stefani Seibold wrote:
> Since some kernel version it is impossible to select the Enhanced Real
> Time Clock Support (legacy PC RTC driver) because RTC_LIB is set by
> default in arch/x86/Kconfig, but the rule for selecting CONFIG_RTC is
> RTC_LIB=n. So the code of driver/char/rtc is still useless.
>
> This breaks the API since there is no more misc device /dev/rtc
> available without a udev rule or a link to /dev/rtc0.
--
~Randy
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> wrote:
> [adding more patch committers]
>
> On 04/13/2014 12:05 PM, Stefani Seibold wrote:
>> Since some kernel version it is impossible to select the Enhanced Real
>> Time Clock Support (legacy PC RTC driver) because RTC_LIB is set by
>> default in arch/x86/Kconfig, but the rule for selecting CONFIG_RTC is
>> RTC_LIB=n. So the code of driver/char/rtc is still useless.
>>
>> This breaks the API since there is no more misc device /dev/rtc
>> available without a udev rule or a link to /dev/rtc0.
So yea.. I feel like that /dev/rtcN renaming (and API) break (which
was a huge and annoying pain) was back in the 2.6.18-ish era?
But it sounds like the driver/char/rtc bit is dead code, and needs a
cleanup? Or is there some use of that code that you need that the
generic RTC layer doesn't have?
thanks
-john
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:16:37 -0700
John Stultz <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> This breaks the API since there is no more misc device /dev/rtc
> >> available without a udev rule or a link to /dev/rtc0.
>
> So yea.. I feel like that /dev/rtcN renaming (and API) break (which
> was a huge and annoying pain) was back in the 2.6.18-ish era?
It's very old and linking/renaming is around since then.
> But it sounds like the driver/char/rtc bit is dead code, and needs a
> cleanup? Or is there some use of that code that you need that the
> generic RTC layer doesn't have?
as far as I know, no recent distribution is using the old code
anymore and the new (well, not so new anymore) framework provides the same functionality.
--
Best regards,
Alessandro Zummo,
Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy
http://www.towertech.it