Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Maciej W. Rozycki
Date: Monday, June 9, 2008 - 11:18 am

Hi,


 I posted a separate change to implement a backend using the RTC class
device.  I think this is the right solution till all the platforms are
moved away from legacy RTC drivers.

 I think you are right about the long-term implications and apart from any
possible quirks I think the interface could get improved as there are RTC
chips we support nowadays that provide sub-second resolution.

  Maciej
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Maciej W. Rozycki, (Wed May 28, 11:15 am)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Rik van Riel, (Wed May 28, 12:17 pm)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Andrew Morton, (Wed May 28, 8:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Maciej W. Rozycki, (Thu May 29, 10:34 am)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Roman Zippel, (Mon Jun 9, 11:06 am)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Maciej W. Rozycki, (Mon Jun 9, 11:18 am)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Andrew Morton, (Mon Jun 9, 2:59 pm)
Re: [PATCH] NTP: Let update_persistent_clock() sleep, Alessandro Zummo, (Mon Jun 9, 3:04 pm)