[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1287452055.2758.62.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 18:34:15 -0700
From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] [RFC] RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerlist for
events
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:10 +0200, Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:38:53 -0700
> John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > This patch reworks a large portion of the generic RTC code
> > to in-effect virtualize the rtc interrupt code.
> >
> > The current RTC interface is very much a raw hardware interface.
> > Via the proc, /dev/, or sysfs interfaces, applications can set
> > the hardware to trigger interrupts in one of three modes:
>
> [...]
>
>
> If everything still works after all those changes,
> it seems a good thing to me ;)
Heh, well, that's a good bit less resistance then I thought I'd get :)
Not that I'm complaining, but Is there anyone else in the RTC community
that you'd recommend getting feedback from on a change this large? I
just want to try to get any back-to-the-blackboard level feedback early
on if possible.
Also, are there any other RTC test cases (other then whats in
Documentation/rtc.txt) that you might recommend to help insure things
are bug-free before submission?
thanks
-john
--
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