linux-kernel - Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] x86: i2c rtc instead of cmos rtc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:41:04 +0100
From:	Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@...ertech.it>
To:	rtc-linux@...glegroups.com
Cc:	eswierk@...stanetworks.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] x86: i2c rtc instead of cmos rtc

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:21:58 -0800
Ed Swierk <eswierk@...stanetworks.com> wrote:

> In our embedded application it's more convenient to build all the
> drivers needed to support various hardware configurations into the
> kernel, and avoid messing with modules. This works fine for devices
> that can be detected dynamically, but RTC chips are among the few that
> need to be configured statically; my change just relaxes the current
> assumption that all x86 boards have a usable CMOS RTC.

 While I can't judge on what's convenient to you, I do not feel
 fine in having a kernel option to disable the rtc and another to load
 a specific i2c one.

 However, if there's a strong consensus from other people
 on the matter, I will close an eye and pretend I haven't seen
 the patch slipping thru :)


-- 

 Best regards,

 Alessandro Zummo,
  Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy

  http://www.towertech.it

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/