linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 5/5] Implement clockevents for R4000-style cp0 timer

To: "Atsushi Nemoto" <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Implement clockevents for R4000-style cp0 timer
From: "Franck Bui-Huu" <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:00:59 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=LW4h5ZuVyUexaXyB05VpUNqO5u0c1qpMy6zHao7r7KK2QI3nO0eDKqc8yR2fXrullsB8RmwkwDqG0hRnId5xlk78zHCnJexNedrgODs80+w0ZlJFNG659lxUwlUb6HJsPSDY7SwdlG1dmvW+WuO1zJYQjeQR7o9TYBVn4dnnmks=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=J4ZXfysNloEwMCjg7lUv7sWzXlOu+9J8SxRSawzLqSOjaiZYCH+OREorXOw51egeGduTSxOZ0fWaSWUqf1bjxkZ2DM/LoZqO3kfA2KPi5FVYH0bs7RlW3N4P9oqa1hjuVuy/A792dDY/0+IP0oi6Dl5RTBCormsnCmD+9vjAPQo=
In-reply-to: <20070614.212913.82089068.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <11818164011355-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <11818164024053-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <20070614.212913.82089068.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Hi Atsushi,

On 6/14/07, Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:20:01 +0200, Franck Bui-Huu <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com> 
wrote:
>  create mode 100644 arch/mips/lib/time.c

I think this to_tm() cleanup should be done in separate patch.


I think so.

Actually that was something Ralf already did and I wanted to reuse.
I'll do that but for now I would like to know if this patch is the
right way to go...

Anyway thanks for noticing.

Maybe selecting RTC_LIB in Kconfig and replace all to_tm() calls with

        rtc_time_to_tm(tim, tm);
        tm->tm_year += 1900;

would be enough.


I dunno, but I think that could be part of another patchset if you don't mind.

--
              Franck

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>