On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:30:38 -0400 Paul Fox <pgf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > or rtc_read_alarm_internal could be patched > > to initialize that field to -1 prior to the call to ops->read_alarm > > i don't think that's sufficient (or even, perhaps, necessary) -- is > it? it's not reading the alarm time where the problem lies. > > as james cameron pointed out, the issue is that ioctl(fd, > RTC_RD_TIME, &rtc) returns a bogus '0' value in the tm_isdst > field. the kernel and RTC drivers should be fixed to contrive > that this field is reported reliably as "don't know", i.e. -1. right, then we can patch rtc_read_time > so i guess i still think that although the kernel should be fixed to > do the right thing with tm_isdst, it would be entirely appropriate > for rtcwake to ignore the tm_isdst value (as proposed in my > patch), and that would probably be correct for quite a long time. you are probably right, anyway I'll make sure every field will be correctly initialized. -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy http://www.towertech.it -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux-ng" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
