Hi Alexandre, On 01.02.23 17:26, Frieder Schrempf wrote: > On 01.02.23 17:15, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> Hello, >> >> You can't do that, this breaks an important use case and it is the >> reason why I didn't use device tree in the beginning. What is wrong with >> setting BSM from userspace? You will anyway have to set the time and >> date from userspace for it to be saved. > > Ok, I was already afraid there is something I missed. Can you give a > short explanation of what use case this would break? > > There is nothing wrong with setting BSM from userspace. It's just the > fact that users expect BSM to be enabled in any case as there is a > battery on the board. It is much more effort to ensure that production, > user, etc. are aware of an extra step required than to let the kernel > deal with it behind the scenes. Would you mind elaborating on your argument that this would break stuff? I currently don't see how an additional optional devicetree property would break anything. Thanks Frieder
