svn commit: r191322 - in head/sys: arm/conf dev/iicbus
stas at FreeBSD.org
Tue Apr 21 18:33:15 UTC 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:18:05 -0600 (MDT)
"M. Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com> mentioned:
> In message: <20090421220138.f6e7b4d4.stas at FreeBSD.org>
> Stanislav Sedov <stas at FreeBSD.org> writes:
> : -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> : Hash: SHA1
> : On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 09:25:05 -0600 (MDT)
> : "M. Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com> mentioned:
> : > In message: <200904201547.n3KFl6Z6050834 at svn.freebsd.org>
> : > Stanislav Sedov <stas at freebsd.org> writes:
> : > : Author: stas
> : > : Date: Mon Apr 20 15:47:06 2009
> : > : New Revision: 191322
> : > : URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/191322
> : > :
> : > : Log:
> : > : - Give a warning and start the oscillator if it was not previously
> : > : runned.
> : > : - Rename ds1672 -> rtc to follow the other drivers.
> : >
> : > This is a bad change. Please back it out. There are multiple
> : > different kinds of rtc clocks that can live on i2c.
> : >
> : Why do you want to? We already have ds133x under the same name. In case
> : if there're multiple clocks in the same systems the first one will
> : have the name of rtc0, the second - rtc1 and so on.
> Because you'll want to support a range of boards that might have
> multiple different kinds of rtc i2c clocks. Calling them all i2c
> won't work because you can't probe the i2c bus in any meaningful way.
> the ds133x one, if it is named rtc, is wrong too.
I still don't fully see your point. If you have two different RTCs
sitting on I2C bus they either have a different address, or they're
attached to different rtc busses. So you can configure them in a
usual way via hints.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the svn-src-all