RE: NTP time sync

[Joakim Tjernlund]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> linuxppc-dev-bounces+joakim.tjernlund=transmode.se@xxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+joakim.tjernlund=transmode.se@ozl
> abs.org] On Behalf Of David Brownell
> Sent: den 26 november 2006 00:22
> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> Cc: akpm@xxxxxxxx; Alessandro Zummo; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxx; 
> lethal@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Linux Kernel Mailing List; 
> ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Andi Kleen; paulus@xxxxxxxxx; 
> rmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; kkojima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: NTP time sync
> 
> On Thursday 23 November 2006 3:00 am, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > 
> > Couldn't we have a transition period by making the kernel 
> not rely on
> > interrupts ? if the NTP irq code just triggers a work 
> queue, then all of
> > a sudden, all of the RTC drivers can be used and the 
> latency is small.
> > That might well be a good enough solution and is very simple.
> 
> Good point.  Of course, one issue is that the NTP sync code all
> seems to be platform-specific right now ... just like the code
> to set the system time from an RTC at boot (except for the new
> RTC framework stuff) and after resume.
> 
> - Dave

Looking at rtc-dev.c I don't see a MARJOR number assigned to /dev/rtcN. Seems like
it is dynamically allocated to whatever major number that is free.
Is that the way it is supposed to be? How do I create a static /dev/rtcN in my /dev
directory if the major number isn't fixed?
Maybe I am just missing something, feel free to correct me :)

 Jocke

-
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/