[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVP3QWvyY11sw-Y440MFpxtjcZRQ+pAP76p35qFvcye6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:21:05 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
alpha <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
RTCLINUX <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/16] rtc: sh: provide rtc_class_ops directly
Hi Rich,
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> Not a complaint about your patch, but I'd like to get rid of this
> platform device and abstraction layer completely since it doesn't seem
> like something that can be modeled correctly in device tree. When
> you're done cleaning this up, will it be possible to just have rtc
> drivers that use whatever generic framework is left, where the right
> driver is automatically attached to compatible DT nodes? I'm trying to
> move all of arch/sh over to device tree and remove hard-coded platform
> devices.
If you describe the RTC in DT, it can bound to a hardware-specific driver
in drivers/rtc/rtc-*.c.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists