Re: [PATCH 5/8] RTC subsystem, dev interface

[Alessandro Zummo]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 01:39:29 -0500
Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >  What the code implements is actually an interface, so this should
> >  be the riht place. It is also fully optional, everything could work
> >  without it. Probably the interface implementation hasn't all the primitives
> >  to handle this kind of work, but I'm not willing to go into that right now ;)
> > 
> 
> Yes, it is an interface. What I am trying to say - is it a main interface?
> What is the preferred, most efficient way to interface with RTC? If it is
> through this interface it may make sence to fold it into the core. Otherwise
> do what input layer does and have interface create another class device which
> reprsesents your /dev node.

 I think it depends on what you want to do. On desktop systems is certainly
 the dev interface, on some embedded you may want to go via sysfs.

 I would keep it that way until the system can react on a change of
 the dev attribute.

-- 

 Best regards,

 Alessandro Zummo,
  Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy

  http://www.towertech.it

-
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/