[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190821112142.GD5128@sirena.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 12:21:42 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
nandor.han@...sala.com, Biwen Li <biwen.li@....com>,
a.zummo@...ertech.it, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2] rtc: pcf85363/pcf85263: fix error that failed to run
hwclock -w
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 01:33:14PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
> Some of the RTC hardware has the capability of address wrapping which
> means if you access a continuous address range across a certain
> boundary(could be the boundary of a regmap region) the hardware
> actually wrap the access to a lower address. But the address
> violation check of regmap rejects such access. According to
> Alexcandre, the address wrapping is essential to the functionality of
It's *essential*? Will innovation never cease?
> some RTC devices and can improve performance for some others. We are
> wondering if it is reasonable to have regmap support this address
> wrapping.
I guess, I don't see any particular reason why not unless the patches
are horrible or get in the way of other stuff.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists