[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3b4bb12-d025-1cc9-6dbd-04913b951425@marek.ca>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 08:58:08 -0400
From: Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@...cinc.com>,
"open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] dt-bindings: rtc: qcom-pm8xxx: document no-alarm
flag
On 10/14/24 3:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 01:15:27AM -0400, Jonathan Marek wrote:
>> Qualcomm x1e80100 firmware sets the ownership of the RTC alarm to ADSP.
>> Thus writing to RTC alarm registers and receiving alarm interrupts is not
>> possible.
>>
>> Add a no-alarm flag to support RTC on this platform.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
>> index d274bb7a534b5..210f76a819e90 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
>> @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ properties:
>> description:
>> Indicates that the setting of RTC time is allowed by the host CPU.
>>
>> + no-alarm:
>> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
>> + description:
>> + Indicates that RTC alarm is not owned by HLOS (Linux).
>
> This is not even properly used/tested, because you disable the RTC
> entirely in your DTS.
>
What? The next patch in this series is enabling RTC on x1e using this flag
> I expect here unified property for all Qualcomm devices for this case.
> We already have "remotely-controlled" and other flavors. I don't want
> each device to express the same with different name...
>
> Also: missing vendor prefix.
>
I don't care what the property is named (as long as its a bool
property), if you have a name you prefer I will use it.
The existing 'allow-set-time' property (also related to HLOS permissions
to the RTC) is also specific to this driver doesn't have a vendor prefix.
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists