[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190401185346.GP3430@piout.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 20:53:46 +0200
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>,
"linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rtc: da9063: set range
On 01/04/2019 17:52:04+0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > > [==========] Running 7 tests from 2 test cases.
> > > [ RUN ] rtc.date_read
> > > rtctest.c:49:rtc.date_read:Current RTC date/time is 01/01/2000 04:06:40.
> > > [ OK ] rtc.date_read
> > > [ RUN ] rtc.uie_read
> > >
> > > And here it blocks forever. Any pointers?
> > >
> >
> > This means that you don't get any interrupt from your RTC (and that I
>
> Thought so. Well, somehow makes sense that no interrupt gets through,
> and not only alarm interrupts...
>
> > have to fix the timeout for uie_read).
>
> :) I am happy to test.
>
Well, seeing the code, I actually remembered that this test is still
there to ensure the core will properly block. If you remove that test,
the other ones should all timeout.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists