rtc-sh correctly reports rtc_wkalrm.enabled
PATCH 1/1 rtc-sh correctly reports rtc_wkalrm.enabled
This fixes the SH rtc driver to
(a) correctly report 'enabled' status with other alarm status;
(b) not duplicate that status in its procfs dump
---
An audit of the RTC driver treatment of the "enabled" flag turned up a handful of clear bugs; most drivers handle it the same now (assuming they support alarms).
This driver has another issue: sh_rtc_set_alarm() ignores the "enabled" flag, rather than using it to tell whether the alarm should be enabled on exit from that routine. One at a time. :)
drivers/rtc/rtc-sh.c +2 -2
@@ -264,8 +264,6 @@ static int sh_rtc_proc(struct device *deunsigned int tmp; tmp =readb (rtc->regbase +RCR1 ); -seq_printf (seq,"alarm_IRQ\t: %s\n" , - (tmp &RCR1_AIE ) ?"yes" :"no" );seq_printf (seq,"carry_IRQ\t: %s\n" , (tmp &RCR1_CIE ) ?"yes" :"no" );
@@ -428,6 +426,8 @@ static int sh_rtc_read_alarm(struct devi tm->tm_mon -=1 ;/* RTC is 1-12, tm_mon is 0-11 */ tm->tm_year =0xffff ; + wkalrm->enabled = (readb (rtc->regbase +RCR1 ) &RCR1_AIE ) ?1 :0 ; +spin_unlock_irq (&rtc->lock);return 0 ;
Quoted 6 lines · David Brownell
This fixes the SH rtc driver to
(a) correctly report 'enabled' status with other alarm status;
(b) not duplicate that status in its procfs dumpSigned-off-by David Brownell <[email protected]>
Looks good, thanks David.
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 08:55:05PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
[...]
Quoted 2 lines
An audit of the RTC driver treatment of the "enabled" flag turned up a handful of clear bugs; most drivers handle it the same now
Yeah, I missed the existing of the enabled flag when I added alarm support to the driver. Your patch is fine.
Quoted 3 lines
This driver has another issue:
sh_rtc_set_alarm()ignores the "enabled" flag, rather than using it to tell whether the alarm should be enabled on exit from that routine. One at a time. :)
I'll can take care of this.
Signature · 1 line
Jamie Lenehan <[email protected]>