lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test

* Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:

> > Plus, the way you're doing it now is violating the locking protocol
> > used by that driver.
>
> Yep, you are right, but that is the easy issue to fix. There's hard
> issue: I need
>
> struct rtc_device *rtc
>
> for the rtc that can be used for system resume, and I'd like to get it
> without violating too many layers. How to do that?
>
> Ideally, I need
>
> set_alarm(int)
>
> ...that will magically pick the right rtc device to talk to, and set
> alarm on it. I don't see how to implement it with current code.

i'd really love to have a /dev/rtc device compatibility APIs, both
inside and outside the kernel. I really dont know why the new RTC code
does not do it - why does it put up artificial anti-adoption barriers to
make it harder to migrate to the new code?

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-02 14:53    [W:0.076 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site