Re: [PATCH 0/2] Adding I2C support to RX6110 RTC

[Alexandre Belloni]

On 06/11/2020 09:57:56+0100, Henning Schild wrote:
> Am Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:59:08 +0100
> schrieb Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> > On 06/11/2020 08:40:34+0100, Henning Schild wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > Am Thu, 5 Nov 2020 23:14:51 +0100
> > > schrieb Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > >   
> > > > Hello Claudius!
> > > > 
> > > > It has been a while ;)
> > > > 
> > > > On 04/11/2020 11:26:27+0100, Claudius Heine wrote:  
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > this patch introduces I2C support to the RX6110 RTC driver and
> > > > > also adds an ACPI identifier to it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Since we are also pushing the coreboot changes for the ACPI
> > > > > table upstream in parallel, we are free to name this ACPI entry
> > > > > however we like it seems. So any feedback on that would be
> > > > > welcome ;) 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't care too much about ACPI so if you are really looking for
> > > > advice there, I guess you should ask seom of the ACPI guys (but I
> > > > guess you are free to choose whatever you want).
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > This is the coreboot stuff currently under review.
> > > 
> > > https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/47235
> > >   
> > 
> > I can't really comment on the patch, however another part is worrying:
> > if VLF is set, coreboot is resetting the time to a valid value (user
> > defined or the build date). This is nasty because this hides the event
> > from the kernel and ulimately, userspace has no way of knowing whether
> > the RTC date is the real date or just a dummy date.
> 
> Is that worrying problem part of the patch, or just a general
> observation looking at their driver?
> 

It is a separate observation on their driver.


-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com