From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757453AbYJ3RGx (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:06:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756115AbYJ3RGF (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:06:05 -0400 Received: from smtp119.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.92]:40234 "HELO smtp119.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756279AbYJ3RGE (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:06:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=tcCr6H6hbWt/LBcTolDuEU+lnzOvE7zVj+NXkEIHJWK7LxKJAaMggA2sNjI2urKugXFZcfPb8qqls+FpaK9J93zD9wi0bAWIY16+ILenSQd2p4PNO74xIuM/hFQXSblIRu+2vqXCpjlaFayrwvdny3v9CGaLYgXQ9CayzcacB2U= ; X-YMail-OSG: iAqfVFwVM1kyScw.QrtFDxFz6E5NRwLrDFnnE_fMe2J.THnwVRVUXvZK1noHySeEeaT4T.AjJvpczGha95GO5mnqNIJCR4m4DPe3voTNCl3hFuJpo2EQyBX0EDfyyb0g3_Y- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: Nate Case Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc-ds1307: Reset bogus register values on m41t00 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:06:01 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1225301377-9092-1-git-send-email-ncase@xes-inc.com> <200810300116.33131.david-b@pacbell.net> <1225379144.27415.111.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1225379144.27415.111.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200810301006.01689.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 30 October 2008, Nate Case wrote: > But, based on what you're saying, it sounds like I should rework this > patch to make a 'ds1307_reset_regs()' function that would be called both > when the registers are found to be in a bogus state (at least for the > m41t00), and also anytime we restart the oscillator for all chips? I think that'd be good, yes. You'r sure that the m41t00 oscillator keeps going in this odd state you're defending against, and it wouldn't suffice to have the time and date registers initialized when restarting the oscillator? - Dave