From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758583AbZDWS2I (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:28:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753987AbZDWS1x (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:27:53 -0400 Received: from mx0.towertech.it ([213.215.222.73]:35686 "HELO mx0.towertech.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756589AbZDWS1w convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:27:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:27:49 +0200 From: Alessandro Zummo To: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com Cc: david-b@pacbell.net, Atsushi Nemoto , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hcegtvedt@atmel.com, vapier@gentoo.org, rongkai.zhan@windriver.com, balajirrao@openmoko.org, broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] rtc: Make rtc_update_irq callable with irqs enabled Message-ID: <20090423202749.767ab73b@i1501.lan.towertech.it> In-Reply-To: <200904231115.57525.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <20090410005820.4fcfcc1f@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <20090424.002900.11623503.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20090423174641.2b03e7a7@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <200904231115.57525.david-b@pacbell.net> Organization: Tower Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed X-This-Is-A-Real-Message: Yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:15:56 -0700 David Brownell wrote: > On Thursday 23 April 2009, Alessandro Zummo wrote: > >  Is not an API change, we are gradually relaxing it if it > >  proves workable :) > > Erm, it *is* an API change at least to the extent that > the last version of the patch made the interface spec > become incorrect. I know, I was just playing it down :) > Current interface spec *requires* that function to be > called with IRQs disabled. > > The downside of that spec is that there's no way to test > it, since CONFIG_LOCKDEP doesn't understand that almost > all IRQ handlers don't disable IRQs. So there are some > bugs in RTC drivers that can only be uncovered by code > review. That's was what I was proposing. I'll give a code review but will not be able to test every driver so I'll need help from the authors. But first I need someone to validate the theory that says that we don't really need the IRQs to be disabled, as I stated in the email to Andrew. do you agree? :) -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy http://www.towertech.it