Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 15 Aug 2021 01:22:15 +0200
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To:     Paul Fertser <fercerpav@gmail.com>
Cc:     Ivan Mikhaylov <i.mikhaylov@yadro.com>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
        openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rtc: pch-rtc: add Intel Series PCH built-in
 read-only RTC
Message-ID: <YRhQJ4kdyu1Xs1Rb@piout.net>
References: <20210810154436.125678-1-i.mikhaylov@yadro.com>
 <20210814224215.GX15173@home.paul.comp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210814224215.GX15173@home.paul.comp>
Precedence: bulk

On 15/08/2021 01:42:15+0300, Paul Fertser wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 06:44:34PM +0300, Ivan Mikhaylov wrote:
> > Add RTC driver with dt binding tree document. Also this driver adds one sysfs
> > attribute for host power control which I think is odd for RTC driver.
> > Need I cut it off and use I2C_SLAVE_FORCE? I2C_SLAVE_FORCE is not good
> > way too from my point of view. Is there any better approach?
> 
> Reading the C620 datasheet I see this interface also allows other
> commands (wake up, watchdog feeding, reboot etc.) and reading statuses
> (e.g Intruder Detect, POWER_OK_BAD).
> 
> I think if there's any plan to use anything other but RTC via this
> interface then the driver should be registered as an MFD.
> 

This is not the current thinking, if everything is integrated, then
there is no issue registering a watchdog from the RTC driver. I'll let
you check with Lee...

However, I'm not sure what is the correct interface for poweroff/reboot
control.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com