On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:34:18AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The rtc-generic driver provides an architecture specific
> wrapper on top of the generic rtc_class_ops abstraction,
> and on sh, that goes through another indirection using
> the rtc_sh_get_time/rtc_sh_set_time functions.
>
> This changes the sh rtc-generic device to provide its
> rtc_class_ops directly, skipping one of the abstraction
> levels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Looks ok in principle. Have you tested that it builds? Some questions
inline:
> ---
> arch/sh/include/asm/rtc.h | 11 -----------
> arch/sh/kernel/time.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
> drivers/rtc/rtc-generic.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/rtc.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/rtc.h
> index 52b0c2dba979..f7b010d48af7 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/include/asm/rtc.h
> +++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/rtc.h
> @@ -6,17 +6,6 @@ extern void (*board_time_init)(void);
> extern void (*rtc_sh_get_time)(struct timespec *);
> extern int (*rtc_sh_set_time)(const time_t);
>
> -/* some dummy definitions */
> -#define RTC_BATT_BAD 0x100 /* battery bad */
> -#define RTC_SQWE 0x08 /* enable square-wave output */
> -#define RTC_DM_BINARY 0x04 /* all time/date values are BCD if clear */
> -#define RTC_24H 0x02 /* 24 hour mode - else hours bit 7 means pm */
> -#define RTC_DST_EN 0x01 /* auto switch DST - works f. USA only */
> -
> -struct rtc_time;
> -unsigned int get_rtc_time(struct rtc_time *);
> -int set_rtc_time(struct rtc_time *);
> -
> #define RTC_CAP_4_DIGIT_YEAR (1 << 0)
>
> struct sh_rtc_platform_info {
> diff --git a/arch/sh/kernel/time.c b/arch/sh/kernel/time.c
> index d6d0a986c6e9..92cd676970d9 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/kernel/time.c
> +++ b/arch/sh/kernel/time.c
> @@ -50,27 +50,30 @@ int update_persistent_clock(struct timespec now)
> }
> #endif
>
> -unsigned int get_rtc_time(struct rtc_time *tm)
> +static int rtc_generic_get_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> - if (rtc_sh_get_time != null_rtc_get_time) {
This seems like a functional change -- whereas previously the
null_rtc_get_time case left *tm unchanged, now the function gets
called and junk gets filled in. Is that desired?
> - struct timespec tv;
> + struct timespec tv;
>
> - rtc_sh_get_time(&tv);
> - rtc_time_to_tm(tv.tv_sec, tm);
> - }
> -
> - return RTC_24H;
> + rtc_sh_get_time(&tv);
> + rtc_time_to_tm(tv.tv_sec, tm);
> + return 0;
Also the return value is changed. Is this correct?
> }
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_rtc_time);
>
> -int set_rtc_time(struct rtc_time *tm)
> +static int rtc_generic_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> unsigned long secs;
>
> rtc_tm_to_time(tm, &secs);
> - return rtc_sh_set_time(secs);
> + if (!rtc_sh_set_time || rtc_sh_set_time(secs) < 0)
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + return 0;
> }
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_rtc_time);
Why checking rtc_sh_set_time for a null pointer? null_rtc_set_time is
not a null pointer but a dummy function that's always safe to call, I
think.
> +
> +static const struct rtc_class_ops rtc_generic_ops = {
> + .read_time = rtc_generic_get_time,
> + .set_time = rtc_generic_set_time,
> +};
>
> static int __init rtc_generic_init(void)
> {
> @@ -79,7 +82,10 @@ static int __init rtc_generic_init(void)
> if (rtc_sh_get_time == null_rtc_get_time)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> - pdev = platform_device_register_simple("rtc-generic", -1, NULL, 0);
> + pdev = platform_device_register_data(NULL, "rtc-generic", -1,
> + &rtc_generic_ops,
> + sizeof(rtc_generic_ops));
> +
Not a complaint about your patch, but I'd like to get rid of this
platform device and abstraction layer completely since it doesn't seem
like something that can be modeled correctly in device tree. When
you're done cleaning this up, will it be possible to just have rtc
drivers that use whatever generic framework is left, where the right
driver is automatically attached to compatible DT nodes? I'm trying to
move all of arch/sh over to device tree and remove hard-coded platform
devices.
Rich
--
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
