linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Implement clockevents for R4000-style cp0 timer
From: "Franck Bui-Huu" <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:38:47 +0200
Cc: "Atsushi Nemoto" <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>, 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=tQw9RS7MzcT9mlGuxj/yLzLLS+CvOwVSi38yBM/nRQiPLoGLh1kqIXhBrW9ZDwZumf3ESj6vWf+rq4AVAcKadQySSy+FXGB7HzMSgzFWFrVvuFaeysLjgmBpqJ+0kmvYqrBJYIG9Ub4GMGsDRTb59AxgsbFaUxQWdfXP9eLwfcs=
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=Ns39vvcQWUC7OjXN+eQzbmsooW4wxnuWGnar/GLsQNKJiPB2CvMVrQmos9oKcB2iEZUOgx7J96mAP+mj9sycBxn2QNRN1y2AxUDfykyJrPchSBVfsER9BAzcSUgz/Cmd6+zPL7hMFaBRB0rkjUu5/ws9pmmiyXCFx4CFN9fht3U=
In-reply-to: <20070618151422.GA4864@linux-mips.org>
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> <20070617000448.GA30807@linux-mips.org> <cda58cb80706180722n18e79a49vfa61450526e6af76@mail.gmail.com> <20070618151422.GA4864@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Hi Ralf,

On 6/18/07, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:22:39PM +0200, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:

> were an interface for _generic_ rtc only. But all the following
> platforms don't seem to use the generic rtc though it initialises
> these function pointers... Any idea why ?

Because unless drivers/char/Kconfig is getting changed to prevent that is
is possible to enable CONFIG_GEN_RTC, so this code was necessary for
correctness.

Sorry I don't understand...

Aside I think it did simply propagate through cutnpaste.
That at least was the reason in the 2.4 days when the old kernel
configuration language made it way to painful to deal with such
configurations.  These days I think we should rather get rid of genrtc.

I think so...

Genrtc used to be nice candy but like most sweets long term it results in
caries ;-)

:)

--
              Franck

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