* [PATCH 1/3] rtc: ftrtc010: switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device
@ 2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device/rtc_register_device. This allow or
further improvement and simplifies ftrtc010_rtc_remove().
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
index af8d6beae20c..165d0b62db00 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
@@ -166,14 +166,18 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (!rtc->rtc_base)
return -ENOMEM;
+ rtc->rtc_dev = devm_rtc_allocate_device(dev);
+ if (IS_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev))
+ return PTR_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev);
+
+ rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
+
ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
if (unlikely(ret))
return ret;
- rtc->rtc_dev = rtc_device_register(pdev->name, dev,
- &ftrtc010_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
- return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(rtc->rtc_dev);
+ return rtc_register_device(rtc->rtc_dev);
}
static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
@@ -184,7 +188,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->extclk);
if (!IS_ERR(rtc->pclk))
clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->pclk);
- rtc_device_unregister(rtc->rtc_dev);
return 0;
}
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-rtc
Cc: linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linus Walleij, linux-arm-kernel,
Alexandre Belloni
Use correct types for offset and time and use
rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
index 165d0b62db00..2cdc78ffeb17 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
@@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
{
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
- unsigned int days, hour, min, sec;
- unsigned long offset, time;
+ u32 days, hour, min, sec, offset;
+ timeu64_t time;
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
time = offset + days * 86400 + hour * 3600 + min * 60 + sec;
- rtc_time_to_tm(time, tm);
+ rtc_time64_to_tm(time, tm);
return 0;
}
@@ -92,13 +92,13 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
{
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
- unsigned int sec, min, hour, day;
- unsigned long offset, time;
+ u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
+ timeu64_t time;
if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
return -EINVAL;
- rtc_tm_to_time(tm, &time);
+ time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
@ 2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Use correct types for offset and time and use
rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
index 165d0b62db00..2cdc78ffeb17 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
@@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
{
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
- unsigned int days, hour, min, sec;
- unsigned long offset, time;
+ u32 days, hour, min, sec, offset;
+ timeu64_t time;
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
time = offset + days * 86400 + hour * 3600 + min * 60 + sec;
- rtc_time_to_tm(time, tm);
+ rtc_time64_to_tm(time, tm);
return 0;
}
@@ -92,13 +92,13 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
{
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
- unsigned int sec, min, hour, day;
- unsigned long offset, time;
+ u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
+ timeu64_t time;
if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
return -EINVAL;
- rtc_tm_to_time(tm, &time);
+ time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni
Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linus Walleij,
linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Use correct types for offset and time and use
> rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index 165d0b62db00..2cdc78ffeb17 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> - unsigned int days, hour, min, sec;
> - unsigned long offset, time;
> + u32 days, hour, min, sec, offset;
> + timeu64_t time;
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
>
> time = offset + days * 86400 + hour * 3600 + min * 60 + sec;
>
> - rtc_time_to_tm(time, tm);
> + rtc_time64_to_tm(time, tm);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -92,13 +92,13 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> - unsigned int sec, min, hour, day;
> - unsigned long offset, time;
> + u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
> + timeu64_t time;
>
> if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - rtc_tm_to_time(tm, &time);
> + time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Use correct types for offset and time and use
> rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index 165d0b62db00..2cdc78ffeb17 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> - unsigned int days, hour, min, sec;
> - unsigned long offset, time;
> + u32 days, hour, min, sec, offset;
> + timeu64_t time;
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
>
> time = offset + days * 86400 + hour * 3600 + min * 60 + sec;
>
> - rtc_time_to_tm(time, tm);
> + rtc_time64_to_tm(time, tm);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -92,13 +92,13 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> {
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> - unsigned int sec, min, hour, day;
> - unsigned long offset, time;
> + u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
> + timeu64_t time;
>
> if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - rtc_tm_to_time(tm, &time);
> + time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-13 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni; +Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linux ARM
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Use correct types for offset and time and use
> rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] rtc: ftrtc010: handle dates after 2106
@ 2018-06-13 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Use correct types for offset and time and use
> rtc_time64_to_tm/rtc_tm_to_time64 to handle dates after 2106 properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-rtc
Cc: linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linus Walleij, linux-arm-kernel,
Alexandre Belloni
The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
handle it.
The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 13 ++++++++++---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
index 2cdc78ffeb17..61f798c6101f 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
@@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
timeu64_t time;
- if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
- return -EINVAL;
-
time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
@@ -120,6 +117,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops ftrtc010_rtc_ops = {
static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
+ u32 days, hour, min, sec;
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc;
struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
struct resource *res;
@@ -172,6 +170,15 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
+ sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
+ min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
+ hour = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_HOUR);
+ days = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_DAYS);
+
+ rtc->rtc_dev->range_min = (u64)days * 86400 + hour * 3600 +
+ min * 60 + sec;
+ rtc->rtc_dev->range_max = U32_MAX + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min;
+
ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
if (unlikely(ret))
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
@ 2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
handle it.
The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
---
drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 13 ++++++++++---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
index 2cdc78ffeb17..61f798c6101f 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
@@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
timeu64_t time;
- if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
- return -EINVAL;
-
time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
@@ -120,6 +117,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops ftrtc010_rtc_ops = {
static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
+ u32 days, hour, min, sec;
struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc;
struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
struct resource *res;
@@ -172,6 +170,15 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
+ sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
+ min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
+ hour = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_HOUR);
+ days = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_DAYS);
+
+ rtc->rtc_dev->range_min = (u64)days * 86400 + hour * 3600 +
+ min * 60 + sec;
+ rtc->rtc_dev->range_max = U32_MAX + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min;
+
ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
if (unlikely(ret))
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni
Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linus Walleij,
linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> handle it.
> The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index 2cdc78ffeb17..61f798c6101f 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
> timeu64_t time;
>
> - if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> @@ -120,6 +117,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops ftrtc010_rtc_ops = {
>
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> + u32 days, hour, min, sec;
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc;
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> struct resource *res;
> @@ -172,6 +170,15 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
>
> + sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> + min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> + hour = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_HOUR);
> + days = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_DAYS);
> +
> + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min = (u64)days * 86400 + hour * 3600 +
> + min * 60 + sec;
> + rtc->rtc_dev->range_max = U32_MAX + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min;
> +
> ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
> IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
> if (unlikely(ret))
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> handle it.
> The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index 2cdc78ffeb17..61f798c6101f 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
> u32 sec, min, hour, day, offset;
> timeu64_t time;
>
> - if (tm->tm_year >= 2148) /* EPOCH Year + 179 */
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> time = rtc_tm_to_time64(tm);
>
> sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> @@ -120,6 +117,7 @@ static const struct rtc_class_ops ftrtc010_rtc_ops = {
>
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> + u32 days, hour, min, sec;
> struct ftrtc010_rtc *rtc;
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> struct resource *res;
> @@ -172,6 +170,15 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
>
> + sec = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_SECOND);
> + min = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_MINUTE);
> + hour = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_HOUR);
> + days = readl(rtc->rtc_base + FTRTC010_RTC_DAYS);
> +
> + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min = (u64)days * 86400 + hour * 3600 +
> + min * 60 + sec;
> + rtc->rtc_dev->range_max = U32_MAX + rtc->rtc_dev->range_min;
> +
> ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
> IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
> if (unlikely(ret))
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-13 9:10 ` Linus Walleij
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni; +Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linux ARM
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> handle it.
Hmmm. I have datasheets, do you need some input about the hardware?
Something I should patch?
> The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
@ 2018-06-13 9:10 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> handle it.
Hmmm. I have datasheets, do you need some input about the hardware?
Something I should patch?
> The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
2018-06-13 9:10 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2018-06-13 9:25 ` Alexandre Belloni
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-13 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linux ARM
On 13/06/2018 11:10:35+0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> > handle it.
>
> Hmmm. I have datasheets, do you need some input about the hardware?
> Something I should patch?
>
Nothing to do as you seemed to confirm what I did was OK. I could find
why it was set to 2148 in the first place. Maybe it correspond to the
default days, hours minutes, second values on the SoC.
> > The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
>
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] rtc: ftrtc010: let the core handle range
@ 2018-06-13 9:25 ` Alexandre Belloni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2018-06-13 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 13/06/2018 11:10:35+0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > The current range handling is highly suspicious. Anyway, let the core
> > handle it.
>
> Hmmm. I have datasheets, do you need some input about the hardware?
> Something I should patch?
>
Nothing to do as you seemed to confirm what I did was OK. I could find
why it was set to 2148 in the first place. Maybe it correspond to the
default days, hours minutes, second values on the SoC.
> > The RTC has a 32 bit counter on top of days + hh:mm:ss registers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
>
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc: ftrtc010: switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni
Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linus Walleij,
linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device/rtc_register_device. This allow or
> further improvement and simplifies ftrtc010_rtc_remove().
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index af8d6beae20c..165d0b62db00 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -166,14 +166,18 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (!rtc->rtc_base)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + rtc->rtc_dev = devm_rtc_allocate_device(dev);
> + if (IS_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev))
> + return PTR_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev);
> +
> + rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
> +
> ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
> IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
> if (unlikely(ret))
> return ret;
>
> - rtc->rtc_dev = rtc_device_register(pdev->name, dev,
> - &ftrtc010_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
> - return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(rtc->rtc_dev);
> + return rtc_register_device(rtc->rtc_dev);
> }
>
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> @@ -184,7 +188,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->extclk);
> if (!IS_ERR(rtc->pclk))
> clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->pclk);
> - rtc_device_unregister(rtc->rtc_dev);
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/3] rtc: ftrtc010: switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device
@ 2018-06-07 14:43 ` Hans Ulli Kroll
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Hans Ulli Kroll @ 2018-06-07 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device/rtc_register_device. This allow or
> further improvement and simplifies ftrtc010_rtc_remove().
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> index af8d6beae20c..165d0b62db00 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ftrtc010.c
> @@ -166,14 +166,18 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (!rtc->rtc_base)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + rtc->rtc_dev = devm_rtc_allocate_device(dev);
> + if (IS_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev))
> + return PTR_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev);
> +
> + rtc->rtc_dev->ops = &ftrtc010_rtc_ops;
> +
> ret = devm_request_irq(dev, rtc->rtc_irq, ftrtc010_rtc_interrupt,
> IRQF_SHARED, pdev->name, dev);
> if (unlikely(ret))
> return ret;
>
> - rtc->rtc_dev = rtc_device_register(pdev->name, dev,
> - &ftrtc010_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
> - return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(rtc->rtc_dev);
> + return rtc_register_device(rtc->rtc_dev);
> }
>
> static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> @@ -184,7 +188,6 @@ static int ftrtc010_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->extclk);
> if (!IS_ERR(rtc->pclk))
> clk_disable_unprepare(rtc->pclk);
> - rtc_device_unregister(rtc->rtc_dev);
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Acked-by: Hans Ulli Kroll <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc: ftrtc010: switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device
2018-06-04 14:15 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2018-06-13 9:07 ` Linus Walleij
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni; +Cc: linux-rtc, linux-kernel, Hans Ulli Kroll, Linux ARM
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device/rtc_register_device. This allow or
> further improvement and simplifies ftrtc010_rtc_remove().
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/3] rtc: ftrtc010: switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device
@ 2018-06-13 9:07 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2018-06-13 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alexandre Belloni
<alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device/rtc_register_device. This allow or
> further improvement and simplifies ftrtc010_rtc_remove().
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread