Re: RFC hwclock: refactoring

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 08:54:59PM -0500, JWP wrote:
> I intentionally did not include --directisa and hwclock-cmos.c in my
> RFC, because my current position is that I2C access should remain in
> hwclock for troubleshooting and testing purposes.

Sure, hwclock-cmos.c is still usable.

> of the main development channel.  I wanted to see if the Alpha and 
> Award code was somehow important to someone.  My opinion is to remove
> it, but maybe there is something I am unaware of.

I think we don't have to care about Award workarounds at all.

Linux kernel provides RTC layer for Alpha, the question is usability,
but I think we can be optimistic and drop the alpha specific cmos code :-)

    Karel


-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux