On Sat 2008-02-02 11:13:21, David Brownell wrote:
quoted text
> On Saturday 02 February 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > > Yep, you are right, but that is the easy issue to fix.
> > > 
> > > Which is why I was puzzled that you didn't start out doing it the 
> > > "right" way ... even just hard-wiring the dubious assumption that 
> > > "rtc0" is the right RTC to use.  :)
> > 
> > because this was mostly about an quick & easy hack to see whether it 
> > makes sense at all to automate the testing of suspend/resume.
> 
> I think you should have written "quick and dirty".  ;)
> 
> It would have been easier to just use the public interface
> and hard-wire "rtc0".  But going directly to the hardware
> was dirtier, and more in the spirit of "hack that obviously
> shouldn't go upstream until it gets done properly".

Yes, it was "quick and dirty". And I do not think it is going
upstream in this form...?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/