On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 13:34 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > my opinion on this kind of stuff is that I want to avoid the layering > > of implementations under the rtc subsystem. I'd rather prefer that each > > rtc device had its own driver. > > > > I've made error in the past, by accepting such kind of drivers, and > > would like to avoid that it happens again. > > So you want us to kill the ppc_md.[gs]et_rtc_time() [ppc], mach_hwclk() [m68k], > mach_gettod() [m68knommu] (and probably a few other) abstractions, and move all > RTC code out of arch/ into seperate drivers under drivers/rtc/ instead? That's the ideal... although did we get NTP sync working again yet? The rtc-ppc driver was intended as a short-term workaround so that we can enable the generic RTC class (which was required for PA Semi Electra, iirc), and still have stuff work on other platforms. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
