Re: a patch for generic MIPS RTC

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>]

On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Atsushi Nemoto wrote:

> macro>  That's how other architectures do this, see e.g.
> macro> "arch/alpha/kernel/time.c".  Why should we be different, even
> macro> for now?
> 
> Please elaborate more ?  Do you mean we should implement default
> rtc_set_mmss() and take the rtc_lock in it ?  Or do you mean we should
> take rtc_lock in each board-dependent rtc_set_time/rtc_set_time ?  

 I'm not sure all chips actually require it.  Certainly the null function 
does not, so that spinlock would incur an unnecessary overhead.  Therefore 
yes, it should be board- or chip-dependent.

> macro> Also the call is named rtc_set_mmss() for an unknown reason
> macro> while all the others have set_rtc_mmss().
> 
> IIRC, you are (one of) the godfather of the function, aren't you?  :-)

 Hmm, I must have got influenced by rtc_set_time()...  Perhaps it wasn't 
that bad after all and it's all the others that should be fixed instead. 
;-)

  Maciej