On 02/03/2018 at 08:46:48 +0000, Steve Twiss wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 8:54 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > subject: [PATCH 000/100] rtc: remove cargo culted code > > mailing list: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Filter messages from this mailing list > > > > Hello, > > > > This series: > > - removes useless calls to rtc_valid_tm in .read_time, .set_time and > > .set_alarm > > - removes code setting default values for RTCs (and lets the core > > handle it) > > - removes useless "time is invalid" messages at probe time > > - removes useless indirect calls > > > > Those were mostly copy pasted from other drivers > > Hi Alexandre, > > Acked for: > rtc: da9063: stop validating rtc_time in .read_time > rtc: da9052: stop validating rtc_time in .read_time > rtc: da9055: stop validating rtc_time in .read_time > > Acked-by: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Agreed -- rtc_valid_tm() call is cargo cult for the above. > > (By definition) for DA9063 I was trying to be rigorous. > The .read_time function is slightly different here because I can make a copy the alarm time into the RTC time > structure to solve an RTC synchronisation problem internally to the DA9063. > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.5.6/source/drivers/rtc/rtc-da9063.c#L253 > > But after some further looking, I have not got any explicit case of how the time read directly from the DA9063 > registers can be incorrectly represented. So there should be no need to check this. > My point is that it is checked later in the core anyway so you end up doing: da9063_rtc_read_time() return rtc_valid_tm(tm); __rtc_read_time() if (err < 0) return err; err = rtc_valid_tm(tm); return err; So the check in da9063_rtc_read_time is always pointless. -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
