On 04.09.2024 17:31, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/time.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/time.c
> @@ -1291,14 +1291,23 @@ static bool __get_cmos_time(struct rtc_time *rtc)
> return t1 <= SECONDS(1) && t2 < MILLISECS(3);
> }
>
> -static bool cmos_probe(struct rtc_time *rtc_p, bool cmos_rtc_probe)
> +static bool __initdata cmos_rtc_probe;
> +boolean_param("cmos-rtc-probe", cmos_rtc_probe);
> +
> +static bool __init cmos_probe(void)
I'm sorry for not paying attention to this earlier, but "cmos" alone
is misleading here and perhaps even more so for cmos_read(). These
aren't about the CMOS (storage) but the CMOS RTC. May I suggest
cmos_rtc_{probe,read}() instead?
> {
> unsigned int seconds = 60;
>
> + if ( !(acpi_gbl_FADT.boot_flags & ACPI_FADT_NO_CMOS_RTC) )
> + return true;
> +
> + if ( !cmos_rtc_probe )
> + return false;
With this I think ...
> for ( ; ; )
> {
> - bool success = __get_cmos_time(rtc_p);
> - struct rtc_time rtc = *rtc_p;
> + struct rtc_time rtc;
> + bool success = __get_cmos_time(&rtc);
>
> if ( likely(!cmos_rtc_probe) )
> return true;
... this ends up being dead code.
Jan
