Hello, On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:35:58 +0200 Brian Murphy <brm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yoichi Yuasa wrote: > > <much snipping> > >> + > >> +config DS1603 > >> + bool "DS1603 RTC driver" > >> + depends on LASAT > >> > > > > If you add new RTC driver, it should go to drivers/rtc. > > > It's hardly new, is it? It was removed by you with the rest > of the LASAT stuff two months ago after it had been in the kernel > for 5 years. Why are RTC drivers more important than any others? > And why is it important that a platform specific driver goes in a > common area when only one platform uses it? DS1603 can be likely to be used with others. But, > The driver is quite platform specific: > > 1) It needs to adjust for a slow transistor on the I/O line to allow > for three-stating. > 2) A special lasat_ndelay which guesses the clock speed based > on platform to allowi the bit-banging interface to control the device > before the CP0 timer is calibrated (by the RTC). > 3) Platform specific I/O which is not programmable (part of an FPGA/CPLD). > > 1 Is basically solved now in an ugly manner with a long delay parameter. > 2 I cant really see a sensible solution to. > 3 I could use the new fancy gpio interface but as the I/O is neither > general or programmable I'm not sure of the point. If someone else > needed the driver then I would have no problem in doing this but as > it is it seems like a waste of time. > > The interface the rtc uses is still used by many drivers implemented > in the platform directories and is much simpler and straightforward > than the general interface used by the drivers in drivers/rtc and will > give more code. > > I have no problems with your other points but I would really like the > RTC code to stay where it is. it's OK with me. Yoichi
