> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Igor Stoppa
> On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 12:55 +0300, Högander Jouni wrote:
>
> > Using them both would also generate more complexity. What would be the
> > benefit in using them both?
>
> The RTC should be used during suspend since it's supposed to keep track
> of time regardless of how long the duration of the suspension is.
>
> The 32kHz alone is not a good generic solution since it overflows after
> a couple of days.
Couple notes over time.
In some older suspend code, an overflow interrupt was programmed which woke and re-slept. The code path never left the local suspend function. This allowed ok time to be kept over a longer time.
Using the RTC if it is I2C can only happen a little later in the wake up flow. Seems some pieces used to get confused if the notion of time was not updated a bit earlier.
If you do rapid suspend/resume when you don't have a good cpuidle some of these things become issues.
Main comment is overflow for suspend can work with out rtc.
Regards,
Richard W.
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
