From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932998AbYD3U3c (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:29:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756738AbYD3U3W (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:29:22 -0400 Received: from mx0.towertech.it ([213.215.222.73]:48448 "HELO mx0.towertech.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756377AbYD3U3U (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:29:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:29:14 +0200 From: Alessandro Zummo To: David Woodhouse Cc: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, paulus@samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] RTC class driver for ppc_md RTC functions Message-ID: <20080430222914.4e1dd640@i1501.lan.towertech.it> In-Reply-To: <1209576873.25560.398.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <18449.48370.434716.293552@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20080428102629.6e702137@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1209371478.25560.114.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080428105245.5c9fff85@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1209378191.25560.121.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080428124033.70e78dcf@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1209380882.25560.127.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080430113933.14651edc@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <1209576873.25560.398.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Organization: Tower Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:34:33 +0100 David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > If we are talking about milliseconds I think a suspect is not enough. > > Let me rephrase: This is how we're doing it for _every_ machine/platform > which supports update_persistent_clock(). It makes sense to let > individual RTC-class drivers do it differently if they need to, but it's > a damn good default behaviour until/unless someone actually shows that > they need it to be different. :) I still do not think that it makes sense to keep an unreliable hw RTC in sync with the system clock.. I remember somone wrote a kind of ntp subsytem for the kernel but can't remember who :( > > My opinion is that such NTP mode could be removed from the kernel/not > > implemented in rtc class without loosing anything. > > Want to send a patch to lkml which removes update_persistent_clock() and > see what people think of that? :) I'm not _that_ mad, unless the patch is signed by Linus :) Anyway I will gladly accept a patch that implements this ntp mode :) -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy http://www.towertech.it