[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal for a new watchdog interface using sysfs
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:48, 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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.068 / U:6.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site