Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:14:31 +0100
From: Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@towertech.it>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] RTC subsystem, dev interface
Message-ID: <20060109101431.16105996@inspiron>
In-Reply-To: <200601090139.29556.dtor_core@ameritech.net>
References: <20060108231235.153748000@linux>
	<200601082150.22213.dtor_core@ameritech.net>
	<20060109041206.6115bafb@inspiron>
	<200601090139.29556.dtor_core@ameritech.net>
Organization: Tower Technologies
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1324
Lines: 35

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 01:39:29 -0500
Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net> wrote:

> > ?What the code implements is actually an interface, so this should
> > ?be the riht place. It is also fully optional, everything could work
> > ?without it. Probably the interface implementation hasn't all the primitives
> > ?to handle this kind of work, but I'm not willing to go into that right now ;)
> > 
> 
> Yes, it is an interface. What I am trying to say - is it a main interface?
> What is the preferred, most efficient way to interface with RTC? If it is
> through this interface it may make sence to fold it into the core. Otherwise
> do what input layer does and have interface create another class device which
> reprsesents your /dev node.

 I think it depends on what you want to do. On desktop systems is certainly
 the dev interface, on some embedded you may want to go via sysfs.

 I would keep it that way until the system can react on a change of
 the dev attribute.

-- 

 Best regards,

 Alessandro Zummo,
  Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy

  http://www.towertech.it

-
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/