[PATCH 11/18] ARM: at91/rtc-at91sam9: each SoC can select the RTT device to use
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <hidden>
Date: 2012-02-20 01:32:48
Also in:
lkml
On 11:32 Mon 20 Feb , Ryan Mallon wrote:
On 18/02/12 04:50, Nicolas Ferre wrote:quoted
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted> For the RTT as RTC driver rtc-at91sam9, the platform_device structure is filled during SoC initialization. This will allow to convert this RTC driver as a standard platform driver. Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <redacted> --- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 11 +++++ arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9261_devices.c | 10 +++++ arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 25 ++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c | 10 +++++ arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c | 10 +++++ drivers/rtc/rtc-at91sam9.c | 61 ++++------------------------- 6 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c index b93a337..2071017 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c@@ -728,8 +728,19 @@ static struct platform_device at91sam9260_rtt_device = { .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(rtt_resources), }; + +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RTC_DRV_AT91SAM9) +static void __init at91_add_device_rtt_rtc(void) +{ + at91sam9260_rtt_device.name = "rtc-at91sam9"; +}Nitpickish: This function doesn't _add_ anything. It would probably be better called at91_init_device_rtt_rtc. Same goes for the other "add" functions in this patch.
yes but an other patch update it to add gpbr resource
quoted
+#else +static void __init at91_add_device_rtt_rtc(void) {} +#endif + static void __init at91_add_device_rtt(void) { + at91_add_device_rtt_rtc(); platform_device_register(&at91sam9260_rtt_device); }Does this work by setting the rtt device name iff CONFIG_RTC_DRV_AT91SAM9 is set? If so, it seems a bit ugly. Why bother doing the platform_device_register at all if you know it isn't going to do anything? Shouldn't the at91sam9260_rrt_device struct declaration and the platform_device_register all be conditional on CONFIG_RTC_DRV_AT91SAM9?
no people use rtt for other purpose RTT is a timer and the rtc use it anyway this will be dropped via DT and the resource will be optional Best Regards, J.