On 15/05/2015 at 20:04:16 +0200, Joachim Eastwood wrote :
> On 15 May 2015 at 19:53, Josh Cartwright <joshc@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 06:31:53PM +0200, Joachim Eastwood wrote:
> >> On 15 May 2015 at 17:23, Josh Cartwright <joshc@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Hello again,
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 03:25:05PM +0200, Joachim Eastwood wrote:
> >> >> Add driver for the RTC found on NXP LPC24xx/178x/18xx/43xx devices.
> >> >> The RTC provides calendar and clock functionality together with
> >> >> periodic tick and alarm interrupt support.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Joachim Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> ---
> > [..]
> >> >> +static int lpc24xx_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> + struct lpc24xx_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> >> >> + u32 ct0, ct1, ct2;
> >> >> +
> >> >> + ct0 = rtc_readl(rtc, LPC24XX_CTIME0);
> >> >> + ct1 = rtc_readl(rtc, LPC24XX_CTIME1);
> >> >> + ct2 = rtc_readl(rtc, LPC24XX_CTIME2);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + tm->tm_sec = CT0_SECS(ct0);
> >> >> + tm->tm_min = CT0_MINS(ct0);
> >> >> + tm->tm_hour = CT0_HOURS(ct0);
> >> >> + tm->tm_wday = CT0_DOW(ct0);
> >> >> + tm->tm_mon = CT1_MONTH(ct1);
> >> >> + tm->tm_mday = CT1_DOM(ct1);
> >> >> + tm->tm_year = CT1_YEAR(ct1);
> >> >> + tm->tm_yday = CT2_DOY(ct2);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if (rtc_valid_tm(tm) < 0) {
> >> >> + dev_warn(dev, "retrieved date and time is invalid\n");
> >> >> + rtc_time64_to_tm(0, tm);
> >> >> + lpc24xx_rtc_set_time(dev, tm);
> >> >> + }
> >> >> +
> >> >> + return 0;
> >> >
> >> > Forcing the read time to be the epoch on failure seems like a pretty
> >> > poor way to handle errors, in my opinion.
> >>
> >> When the device doesn't have battery the CTIME registers contains an
> >> invalid value. So if you don't set them to something valid you will
> >> get a warning each time you try to read the RTC. To "fix" that problem
> >> I set the time at epoch which make the CTIME registers to contain a
> >> valid value. Since the value is already useless I think setting it to
> >> epoch is an improvement in this case.
> >
> > I see. I think doing this setting in your read_time callback is the
> > wrong place to do this check. I'm thinking a better place for it would
> > be in your driver's probe().
>
> That is a good idea. I'll move the check to probe instead.
>
Actually, it is never a good idea to set the time to epoch at all because
then userspace, will assume that the time is valid. You should return
an error until userspace sets the time. You can drop the dev_warn and
simply return rtc_valid_tm(tm);
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
