Hi!

quoted

quoted

quoted

This is it.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6219401/

Thanks.

Yes, that's argument against changing rtc _drivers_ for hardware that
can not do better than 32bit. For generic code (such as 44/51 sysfs,
51/51 suspend test), the change still makes sense.

What I had in mind when writing those patches was to remove the limitations
coming from those functions usage, even more since they been marked has
deprecated.

I agree that will change nothing of hardware limitation but at least
the limit will
not come from the framework.

quoted

Yes, we agree on that but I won't cherry pick working patches from a 51
patches series.

Well, it would be actually nice for you to do the cherry
picking. That's something maintainers do, because it is hard for
contributors to guess maintainer's taste.

Anyway, it looks like someone should go through all the RTC drivers,
and document their limitations of each driver (date in future when
hardware ceases to be useful). If Benjamin has time to do that, I
guess that removes all the objections to the series.

Regards,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux".
Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux .
Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist
before submitting a driver.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rtc-linux" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rtc-linux+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.