From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>

The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
architecture.

Signed-off-by: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
index cb7da4415599..c24b88b0206e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
@@ -1227,6 +1227,7 @@ CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DA9063=m
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_EFI=y
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_CROS_EC=y
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_FSL_FTM_ALARM=m
+CONFIG_RTC_DRV_S32G=m
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_S3C=y
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_PL031=y
 CONFIG_RTC_DRV_SUN6I=y
-- 
2.45.2

On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
> From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
> 
> The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
> during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
> architecture.
Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
see single reason for this patch.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 4/4/2025 9:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
>> From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
>>
>> The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
>> during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
>> architecture.
> Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
> see single reason for this patch.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

The RTC module is used by all the currently supported S32G2/S32G3 
boards, so currently they are: S32G274A-EVB, S32G274A-RDB2, S32G399A-RDB3.
I do see your point in the fact that this driver should be enabled as 
module only after platforms are actually using it.

So, would it be better for me to send a V10 in this series with the DTS 
patch added ?

Best Regards,
Ciprian

On 04/04/2025 08:24, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
> On 4/4/2025 9:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
>>> From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
>>>
>>> The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
>>> during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
>>> architecture.
>> Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
>> see single reason for this patch.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> The RTC module is used by all the currently supported S32G2/S32G3 
> boards, so currently they are: S32G274A-EVB, S32G274A-RDB2, S32G399A-RDB3.

I don't think so. I looked at these DTS and there is no RTC.

> I do see your point in the fact that this driver should be enabled as 
> module only after platforms are actually using it.

No, post the user. I don't see the point of sending defconfig patch with
RTC patchset anyway. That's different subsystem.

> 
> So, would it be better for me to send a V10 in this series with the DTS 
> patch added ?

No, separate patchsets.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 4/4/2025 10:15 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/04/2025 08:24, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
>> On 4/4/2025 9:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
>>>> From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
>>>>
>>>> The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
>>>> during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
>>>> architecture.
>>> Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
>>> see single reason for this patch.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>
>> The RTC module is used by all the currently supported S32G2/S32G3
>> boards, so currently they are: S32G274A-EVB, S32G274A-RDB2, S32G399A-RDB3.
> 
> I don't think so. I looked at these DTS and there is no RTC.
> 
>> I do see your point in the fact that this driver should be enabled as
>> module only after platforms are actually using it.
> 
> No, post the user. I don't see the point of sending defconfig patch with
> RTC patchset anyway. That's different subsystem.
> 
>>
>> So, would it be better for me to send a V10 in this series with the DTS
>> patch added ?
> 
> No, separate patchsets.

Ok. I will send out a V10 in which I will drop this current patch from 
the patchset. Also, I will send the DTS patch which adds S32G274A-EVB, 
S32G274-RDB2 and S32G399A-RDB3 usage of the RTC after this patchset gets 
accepted.

Best Regards,
Ciprian

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

On 04/04/2025 10:19:56+0300, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
> On 4/4/2025 10:15 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 04/04/2025 08:24, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
> > > On 4/4/2025 9:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
> > > > > From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
> > > > > during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
> > > > > architecture.
> > > > Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
> > > > see single reason for this patch.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Krzysztof
> > > 
> > > The RTC module is used by all the currently supported S32G2/S32G3
> > > boards, so currently they are: S32G274A-EVB, S32G274A-RDB2, S32G399A-RDB3.
> > 
> > I don't think so. I looked at these DTS and there is no RTC.
> > 
> > > I do see your point in the fact that this driver should be enabled as
> > > module only after platforms are actually using it.
> > 
> > No, post the user. I don't see the point of sending defconfig patch with
> > RTC patchset anyway. That's different subsystem.
> > 
> > > 
> > > So, would it be better for me to send a V10 in this series with the DTS
> > > patch added ?
> > 
> > No, separate patchsets.
> 
> Ok. I will send out a V10 in which I will drop this current patch from the
> patchset. Also, I will send the DTS patch which adds S32G274A-EVB,
> S32G274-RDB2 and S32G399A-RDB3 usage of the RTC after this patchset gets
> accepted.
> 

I don't need V10, I can apply V9 without 3/4 and 4/4

> Best Regards,
> Ciprian
> 
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> 

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

On 4/4/2025 11:53 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 04/04/2025 10:19:56+0300, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
>> On 4/4/2025 10:15 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 04/04/2025 08:24, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote:
>>>> On 4/4/2025 9:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 03/04/2025 12:33, Ciprian Costea wrote:
>>>>>> From: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The RTC hardware module present on S32G based SoCs tracks clock time
>>>>>> during system suspend and it is used as a wakeup source on S32G2/S32G3
>>>>>> architecture.
>>>>> Which boards are using it? I don't see any DTS (nowhere), so I do not
>>>>> see single reason for this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> The RTC module is used by all the currently supported S32G2/S32G3
>>>> boards, so currently they are: S32G274A-EVB, S32G274A-RDB2, S32G399A-RDB3.
>>>
>>> I don't think so. I looked at these DTS and there is no RTC.
>>>
>>>> I do see your point in the fact that this driver should be enabled as
>>>> module only after platforms are actually using it.
>>>
>>> No, post the user. I don't see the point of sending defconfig patch with
>>> RTC patchset anyway. That's different subsystem.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, would it be better for me to send a V10 in this series with the DTS
>>>> patch added ?
>>>
>>> No, separate patchsets.
>>
>> Ok. I will send out a V10 in which I will drop this current patch from the
>> patchset. Also, I will send the DTS patch which adds S32G274A-EVB,
>> S32G274-RDB2 and S32G399A-RDB3 usage of the RTC after this patchset gets
>> accepted.
>>
> 
> I don't need V10, I can apply V9 without 3/4 and 4/4
> 

Ok. Thanks for letting me know.

Ciprian

>> Best Regards,
>> Ciprian
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>
>