On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 12:02 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 11:24 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Looking deeper it's actually simple. MID already overloads the > > > timer_init() > > > setup function. So we can just do it there. > > > > Yes, it does. However I have another solution, just would like to > > discuss. > > > > There is a timekeeping_init() call, which is a first user of the > > RTC. > > I have 3 changes: > > - introduce arch_pre_timekeeping_init() and move wallclock_init() > > call > > there > > Oh no, please don't add yet another arch hook just because we can.
I see. > > - use almost your initial suggestion > > - move wallclock_init() to x86_platform and rename to > > init_wallclock() > > to be consistent with the rest of wallclock API (this, though, has > > item > > to discuss, i.e. __init use for callbacks) > > > > This would allow to clearly initialize virtual RTC or legacy one at > > the > > same know point. > > What's wrong with setting up the rtc interrupt in that existing mid > function? It's a platform quirk and we really do no need yet another > hook > to make it look 'generic'. Nothing else than MID uses it. Nothing specifically wrong. I would give a try to this and send a patch if everything okay. -- Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Intel Finland Oy
