mrg@eterna.com.au wrote:

> .. 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?

>    (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.
---
Izumi Tsutsui