> .. i don't really see why "mcclock" is a better name.
   
   Just some other ports use the name, and "rtc" looks too generic
   (mostek is also rtc) etc?

iirc, "rtc" is the name of the OFW node?  it seems OK to me - the pain
of making everyone update their configs does not seem worth it...
   
   >    (BTW I wonder if we need eeprom at sbus and clock at mainbus stuff)
   > 
   > hmm?  i don't understand this.
   
   Current files.sparc64 has the following lines:
   ---
   attach clock at mainbus, sbus with clock_sbus
    :
   device eeprom
   attach eeprom at sbus, ebus
   ---
   
   but I'm not sure if they are actually needed, or leftover from sparc port.


looks like left over and should be deleted.