Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932658Ab3DBPdU (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Apr 2013 11:33:20 -0400 Received: from smtp.infotech.no ([82.134.31.41]:49980 "EHLO smtp.infotech.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761236Ab3DBPdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Apr 2013 11:33:18 -0400 Message-ID: <515AFA0B.7020509@interlog.com> Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:32:27 -0400 From: Douglas Gilbert Reply-To: dgilbert@interlog.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicolas Ferre CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jhovold@gmail.com, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Ludovic Desroches , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] rtc: rtc-at91rm9200: manage IMR depending on revision References: <1364573029-19346-5-git-send-email-jhovold@gmail.com> <1364908007-5150-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <1364908007-5150-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.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 Content-Length: 1630 Lines: 35 On 13-04-02 09:06 AM, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre > --- > Hi all, > > The funny thing is that I was writing exactly the same code as Johan's > when he posted his series. > > So, here is my single patch, with the comment about the readback stolen from > Johan's, but without the way to determine with IP is buggy and which one is > not... > After having dug the possibility to read the IP revision, I discovered that it > is not possible to use this information ("version" register offset changing > according to... IP version number: well done!). > In conclusion, I guess that the only way to determine if we need the workaround > is to use the DT. > One remark though: if we use the compatibility string for this purpose, I fear > that we would twist the meaning of this information: SoC using an > "atmel,at91sam9x5-rtc" compatible RTC will not necessarily be touched by the > "non responding IMR" bug: at91sam9n12 or upcoming sama5d3 are not affected for > instance, and we need to cling to "atmel,at91rm9200-rtc" for them... > I think that we can use this method for the moment and move to another > compatibility string later if it is needed. Rather than have so many people working on rtc-at91rm9200.c, how about someone bring its "RTT" sibling into the DT world. I'm talking about drivers/rtc/rtc-at91sam9.c ... Doug Gilbert -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/