Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752545AbZLXFKo (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:10:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752239AbZLXFKn (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:10:43 -0500 Received: from 124x34x33x190.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp ([124.34.33.190]:48739 "EHLO master.linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751890AbZLXFKj (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:10:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 14:10:21 +0900 From: Paul Mundt To: David Miller Cc: johnstul@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rth@twiddle.net, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, hskinnemoen@atmel.com, vapier@gentoo.org, starvik@axis.com, dhowells@redhat.com, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, tony.luck@intel.com, takata@linux-m32r.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com, kyle@mcmartin.ca Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/14] Convert remaining arches to read/update_persistent_clock Message-ID: <20091224051021.GA28878@linux-sh.org> References: <1261540762.3508.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20091223050810.GA25791@linux-sh.org> <20091223.205415.232734959.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091223.205415.232734959.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1249 Lines: 25 On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 08:54:15PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: Paul Mundt > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:08:10 +0900 > > > In any event, I wonder if it might make more sense to take something like > > the SPARC implementation that is simply a wrapper around the RTC, move > > that out in to a more generic place, and permit architectures to select > > an RTC class backed persistent clock instead (it seems to be only > > platforms that haven't caught up yet in terms of generic time and RTC > > migration that would want to define this interface on their own at all at > > this point)? > > This sounds nice but don't we have a slew of RTC types that need > to be accessed over I2C and thus you can't touch them without > sleeping? Yes, and SPI and so on. We do however have plenty of available room for adding a valid-for-persistent-clock flag to permit drivers to opt-in, so we can certainly still do better than the status quo. I'll hack something up and see how it goes. -- 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/