Christopher,
-Original Message-
From: linux-omap-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-omap-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of
Christopher Friedt
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 5:03 PM
To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: patch: add omap730 / omap850 rtc support
Christopher
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:11 AM, G, Manjunath Kondaiah manj...@ti.com wrote:
Any advantage of using both enum and register offsets?
You can have only register offset macros instead of enum.
This was the appproach proposed by Tony in response to Alistair's
original query. Tony originally cited
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:11 AM, G, Manjunath Kondaiah
manj...@ti.com wrote:
Any advantage of using both enum and register offsets?
You can have only register offset macros instead of enum.
This was the appproach proposed by Tony in response to Alistair's
original query. Tony
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM, G, Manjunath Kondaiah manj...@ti.com wrote:
You can acheive the same using only enum with following:
#define OMAP_RTC_REGISTER_SIZE (cpu_is_omap7xx()?1:4)
#define rtc_read(reg)
omap_readb(OMAP_RTC_BASE + (reg * OMAP_RTC_REGISTER_SIZE))
That was my
I decided on using 31 because
=
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-omap.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-omap.c
index 0587d53..cc25f4f 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-omap.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-omap.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
#include linux/platform_device.h
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Friedt [mailto:chrisfri...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 6:58 PM
To: G, Manjunath Kondaiah
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: patch: add omap730 / omap850 rtc support
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM, G, Manjunath
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Christopher Friedt
chrisfri...@gmail.com wrote:
I decided on using 31 because
sorry, that should read '' because 1/32768 is between 30 and 31
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in
the body of a message to
