On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 06:10 +0000, Darik Horn wrote:
> A refinement of the proposed udev rule would be
>
> KERNEL=="rtc0", ATTR{name}=="rtc_cmos", DRIVERS=="rtc_cmos",
> SYMLINK+="rtc"
>
Actually, it need not be that complex:
This would preserve the "CMOS RTC is /dev/rtc" behaviour from previous
kernels, any additional RTCs wouldn't be linked there - but unless I'm
misunderstanding this, the kernel never had a /dev/rtc for those before
anyway.
> so that it catches the corner-case of a customized local kernel with a
> second static rtc driver. A solution any more fancy would require
> something like writing a '70-persistent-rtc.rules' file and a patching
> `/lib/udev/path_id` to recognize the rtc device class.
>
After talking to upstream, I'm convinced that anything fancier should
enumerate RTC devices the "modern" way.
Preserving the /dev/rtc symlink for the CMOS driver is correct though.
Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
<email address hidden>
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 06:10 +0000, Darik Horn wrote:
> A refinement of the proposed udev rule would be =="rtc_ cmos", DRIVERS= ="rtc_cmos" ,
>
> KERNEL=="rtc0", ATTR{name}
> SYMLINK+="rtc"
>
Actually, it need not be that complex:
SUBSYSTEM=="rtc", DRIVERS= ="rtc_cmos" , SYMLINK+="rtc"
This would preserve the "CMOS RTC is /dev/rtc" behaviour from previous
kernels, any additional RTCs wouldn't be linked there - but unless I'm
misunderstanding this, the kernel never had a /dev/rtc for those before
anyway.
> so that it catches the corner-case of a customized local kernel with a rtc.rules' file and a patching
> second static rtc driver. A solution any more fancy would require
> something like writing a '70-persistent-
> `/lib/udev/path_id` to recognize the rtc device class.
>
After talking to upstream, I'm convinced that anything fancier should
enumerate RTC devices the "modern" way.
Preserving the /dev/rtc symlink for the CMOS driver is correct though.
Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
<email address hidden>