Re: [PATCH 2/2] alarmtimers: Return -ENOTSUPP if no RTC device is present

[richard -rw- weinberger]

2011/6/22 John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Toralf Förster and Richard Weinberger noted that if there is
> no RTC device, the alarm timers core prints out an annoying
> "ALARM timers will not wake from suspend" message.
>
> This warning has been removed in a previous patch, however
> the issue still remains:  The original idea was to support
> alarm timers even if there was no rtc device, as long as the
> system didn't go into suspend.
>
> However, after further consideration, communicating to the application
> that alarmtimers are not fully functional seems like the better
> solution.
>
> So this patch makes it so we return -ENOTSUPP to any posix _ALARM
> clockid calls if there is no backing RTC device on the system.
>
> Further this changes the behavior where when there is no rtc device
> we will check for one on clock_getres, clock_gettime, timer_create,
> and timer_nsleep instead of on suspend.
>
> CC: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@xxxxxx>
> CC: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx

Ahhh, the missing ">" explains why I didn't receive this mail. :-)

-- 
Thanks,
//richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/