On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:26:29 +0100 (CET)
Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:

Thanks Paul, I wasn't aware of that thread!

Yes, this is almost the same. The only part I don't agree with is the move of
the creation of the platform device from arch-specific code to rtc-firmware.c,
as this makes autoloading the driver more difficult.

 and it's also against a proper implementation of the device/driver model.

Seems like everybody but the RTC maintainer has an interest in having an RTC
class driver on top of [gs]et_rtc_time()... ;-)

 That's because everyone is lazy :) 

 Seriously, if you want to handle it in the way we wrote
 in the previous emails, it's ok for me.

-- 

 Best regards,

 Alessandro Zummo,
  Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy

  http://www.towertech.it