>>>>> On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 13:19:50 -0800, Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com> said: >> By the way, with this patch, individual board can not implement >> it's own genrtc routines. How about making gen_rtc_time, >> etc. pointer to functions to allow overrides? jsun> Is this necessary? How about letting us wait until there is a jsun> sensible need? OK, we can wait. But still I suppose gen_rtc_time will become a pointer sooner or later.... Anyway, I think using genrtc instead of mips-rtc is very good idea. Thank you. jsun> If I understand you correctly, you like to have board rtc read jsun> routines to return a rtc structure instead of the unsigned long jsun> integer. jsun> There are actually boards which makes the current implementation jsun> more efficient. See vr4181. I see. jsun> In general, however, this is not a bad idea, just involving a jsun> lot more board level changes. I think it deserves another patch jsun> or even debate. Though I'm not have a real code yet, how about this idea? 1. Provide std_rtc_get_time (returns ulong) implemented with get_rtc_time (returns rtc struct) pointer. 2. Provide std_get_rtc_time (returns rtc struct) implemented with rtc_get_time returns ulong) pointer. 3. Each board implement its own rtc_get_time or get_rtc_time. 4. In generic time_init(), initialize rtc_get_time pointer or get_rtc_time pointer with std_rtc_get_time or std_get_rtc_time if they were NULL. --- Atsushi Nemoto
