[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080430222914.4e1dd640@i1501.lan.towertech.it>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:29:14 +0200
From: Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@...ertech.it>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, paulus@...ba.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] RTC class driver for ppc_md RTC
functions
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:34:33 +0100
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > If we are talking about milliseconds I think a suspect is not enough.
>
> Let me rephrase: This is how we're doing it for _every_ machine/platform
> which supports update_persistent_clock(). It makes sense to let
> individual RTC-class drivers do it differently if they need to, but it's
> a damn good default behaviour until/unless someone actually shows that
> they need it to be different. :)
I still do not think that it makes sense to keep an unreliable hw RTC in
sync with the system clock..
I remember somone wrote a kind of ntp subsytem for the kernel but can't
remember who :(
> > My opinion is that such NTP mode could be removed from the kernel/not
> > implemented in rtc class without loosing anything.
>
> Want to send a patch to lkml which removes update_persistent_clock() and
> see what people think of that? :)
I'm not _that_ mad, unless the patch is signed by Linus :)
Anyway I will gladly accept a patch that implements this ntp mode :)
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists