Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:50:54 +0100 | From | Alexandre Belloni <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] Add virtio_rtc module and related changes |
| |
On 13/03/2024 14:06:42+0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > If you're asking why patch 7/7 in Peter's series exists to expose the > virtio clock through RTC, and you're not particularly interested in the > first six, I suppose that's a fair question. As is the question of "why > is it called virtio_rtc not virtio_ptp?". >
Exactly my question, thanks :)
> But let me turn it around: if the kernel has access to this virtio > device and *not* any other RTC, why *wouldn't* the kernel use the time > from it? The fact that it can optionally *also* provide paired readings > with the CPU counter doesn't actually *hurt* for the RTC use case, does > it?
As long as it doesn't behave differently from the other RTC, I'm fine with this. This is important because I don't want to carry any special infrastructure for this driver or to have to special case this driver later on because it is incompatible with some evolution of the subsystem.
-- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
| |