[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202511162208431d06192b@mail.local>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2025 23:08:43 +0100
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To: Akhilesh Patil <akhilesh@...iitb.ac.in>
Cc: andriy.shevchenko@...el.com, david.daney@...ium.com,
ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, david.hunter.linux@...il.com,
skhan@...uxfoundation.org, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akhileshpatilvnit@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: isl12026: Implement callbacks for alarm feature
On 16/11/2025 10:47:15+0530, Akhilesh Patil wrote:
> > > static const struct rtc_class_ops isl12026_rtc_ops = {
> > > .read_time = isl12026_rtc_read_time,
> > > .set_time = isl12026_rtc_set_time,
> > > + .set_alarm = isl12026_rtc_set_alarm,
> > > + .read_alarm = isl12026_rtc_read_alarm,
> > > + .alarm_irq_enable = isl12026_rtc_alarm_irq_en,
> > > };
> > >
> >
> > This is missing an interrupt handler and proper handling in probe for
> > the wakeup-source property as this seems to be how you use it.
>
> Agree. However, I thought of first implementing alarm callbacks only and
> test them independedntly using ioctls for alarm settings in this patch.
> I will add interrupt handler and wakeup-source in v2 to complete this
> functionality.
Sure, the issue is that without interrupt handling and wakeup-source,
the driver will behave in a way that will break DT backward
compatibility later on.
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists