Hi,
On 12/01/2017 at 11:43:37 +0100, Fabien Lahoudere wrote :
> If RTC time have been altered by low voltage, we notify users
> that RTC time is invalid by returning -EINVAL.
> The RTC time needs to be set correctly to clear the invalid flag.
> If the RTC is not set before restarting, the informat
On 12/01/2017 at 11:43:38 +0100, Fabien Lahoudere wrote :
> Implements RTC_VL_READ and RTC_VL_CLR ioctls.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabien Lahoudere
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-s35390a.c | 40 ++--
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/driv
On 16/01/2017 at 17:13:49 +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote :
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:39:59PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 16/01/2017 at 16:21:48 +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote :
> > > The RTC is clocked from either an internal, imprecise, oscillator or an
> > > external one, which is usually m
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:39:59PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 16/01/2017 at 16:21:48 +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote :
> > The RTC is clocked from either an internal, imprecise, oscillator or an
> > external one, which is usually much more accurate.
> >
> > The difference perceived betwe
On 16/01/2017 at 16:21:48 +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote :
> The RTC is clocked from either an internal, imprecise, oscillator or an
> external one, which is usually much more accurate.
>
> The difference perceived between the time elapsed and the time reported by
> the RTC is in a 10% scale, which pr
The RTC is clocked from either an internal, imprecise, oscillator or an
external one, which is usually much more accurate.
The difference perceived between the time elapsed and the time reported by
the RTC is in a 10% scale, which prevents the RTC from being useful at all.
Fortunately, the extern
Hi Amélie,
On 01/05/2017 02:43 PM, Amelie Delaunay wrote:
This patch adds STM32 RTC support in stm32_defconfig file.
Signed-off-by: Amelie Delaunay
---
arch/arm/configs/stm32_defconfig | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/stm32_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/st
Yeah. I just read your patch now. Thanks.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux".
Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux .
Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist
before submitting a drive
I've changed the comparison:
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ static int stm32_rtc_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
pred_s = (rate / (pred_a + 1)) - 1;
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "ck_rtc is %s\n",
-(rate - ((pred_a + 1) * (pred_s + 1)) < 0) ?
+
Oh. That still won't fix this:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c
519 /*
520 * Can't find a 1Hz, so give priority to RTC power consumption
521 * by choosing the higher possible value for prediv_a
522 */
523 if ((pred_s > pred_s_max) || (pred_a >
Hi Dan,
Thanks for reporting this issue.
I've already send a fix ("rtc: stm32: fix comparison warnings"):
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9518411/.
Regards,
Amelie
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan Carpenter [mailto:dan.carpen...@oracle.com]
> Sent: lundi 16 janvier 2017 13:14
> To: A
Hello Amelie Delaunay,
The patch 4e64350f42e2: "rtc: add STM32 RTC driver" from Jan 11,
2017, leads to the following static checker warning:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c:514 stm32_rtc_init()
warn: always true condition '(pred_a >= 0) => (0-u32max >= 0)'
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c
499
This patches fixes comparison between signed and unsigned values as it
could produce an incorrect result when the signed value is converted to
unsigned:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c: In function 'stm32_rtc_valid_alrm':
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c:404:21: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned
int
Using the ~ operator on a BIT() constant results in a large 'unsigned long'
constant that won't fit into an 'unsigned int' function argument on 64-bit
architectures, resulting in a harmless build warning in x86 allmodconfig:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c: In function 'stm32_rtc_probe':
drivers/rtc/rtc-s
14 matches
Mail list logo
