[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3fa7337e-6bbc-4462-9704-2d8ac20a9cf2@email.android.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 11:07:11 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>
CC: "matt.fleming@...el.com" <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc-efi: register rtc-efi device when EFI enabled
We do have such machines, which is why this change has been reverted twice already. I believe we should stick to the priority scheme I proposed a few weeks ago.
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 2012-12-29 at 00:26 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
>> UEFI time services, GetTime(), SetTime(), GetWakeupTime(),
>SetWakeupTime() are also
>> supported by other non-IA64 architecutre with UEFI BIOS, e.g. x86.
>>
>> This patch changed RTC_DRV_EFI configuration to depend on EFI but not
>just IA64. It
>> checks efi_enabled flag and efi-rtc driver should enabled.
>
>In theory, certainly - but do we still have machines that explode if
>the
>get_time call is made? We may also want to think about disabling the
>legacy access to the RTC if the EFI calls are present.
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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