Hi Alexandre, On 06.03.23 14:27, Frieder Schrempf wrote: > On 13.02.23 10:18, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >> Hi Alexandre, >> >> On 01.02.23 17:26, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>> On 01.02.23 17:15, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> You can't do that, this breaks an important use case and it is the >>>> reason why I didn't use device tree in the beginning. What is wrong with >>>> setting BSM from userspace? You will anyway have to set the time and >>>> date from userspace for it to be saved. >>> >>> Ok, I was already afraid there is something I missed. Can you give a >>> short explanation of what use case this would break? >>> >>> There is nothing wrong with setting BSM from userspace. It's just the >>> fact that users expect BSM to be enabled in any case as there is a >>> battery on the board. It is much more effort to ensure that production, >>> user, etc. are aware of an extra step required than to let the kernel >>> deal with it behind the scenes. >> >> Would you mind elaborating on your argument that this would break stuff? >> I currently don't see how an additional optional devicetree property >> would break anything. > > Ping!? It seems like you decided to ignore me for whatever reasons there are. I'm sure we can sort it out in some way if you would respond, please. Thanks Frieder
