Hello,
On 29/11/2018 17:57:05-0200, Rafael David Tinoco wrote:
> On 4/19/18 9:50 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
> > events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
> > any underlying hardware
Hello,
On 29/11/2018 17:57:05-0200, Rafael David Tinoco wrote:
> On 4/19/18 9:50 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
> > events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
> > any underlying hardware
On 4/19/18 9:50 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
> events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
> any underlying hardware RTC.
>
> Move PIE testing out of rtctest. It still depends on the presence
On 4/19/18 9:50 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
> events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
> any underlying hardware RTC.
>
> Move PIE testing out of rtctest. It still depends on the presence
Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
any underlying hardware RTC.
Move PIE testing out of rtctest. It still depends on the presence of an RTC
(to access the device file) but doesn't
Since commit 6610e0893b8bc ("RTC: Rework RTC code to use timerqueue for
events"), PIE are completely handled using hrtimers, without actually using
any underlying hardware RTC.
Move PIE testing out of rtctest. It still depends on the presence of an RTC
(to access the device file) but doesn't
6 matches
Mail list logo