Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal for a new watchdog interface using sysfs | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 14 Feb 2003 14:57:39 +0000 |
| |
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:48, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > I admit not having thoroughly read the source to check - is the userspace API > for accessing all these chips fairly uniform and rational, so that a user > program can be reasonably sure that if stat("/dev/watchdog") returns zero, that > it knows how to deal with it? Or are they all sufficiently close to the "keep > reloading a countdown timer from userspace, and if it ever doesn't get reloaded, > kick the kernel in the seat of the pants" programming model? Of course, even > a disagreement on the units of the timer could be bad - a seconds/milliseconds > clash could result is a *real* fast lack-of-joy situation.. ;)
watchdog interfaces have a defined API, which they all follow fairly closely. That makes adding watchdogs as a device class nice and easy
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |