Messages in this thread | | | From | H Hartley Sweeten <> | Date | Thu, 4 Aug 2011 13:29:00 -0500 | Subject | RE: [RFC PATCH v2] watchdog: ep93xx: Use the WatchDog Timer Driver Core. |
| |
On Thursday, August 04, 2011 11:13 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 10:21:26AM -0700, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: >> Convert the ep93xx watchdog driver to using the WatchDog Timer Driver Core. >> >> Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com> >> Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be> >> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > > Tested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@iki.fi>
Thanks!
> > BTW, now that the driver uses watchdog core should we also select > WATCHDOG_CORE in the Kconfig? If it is not enabled we get: > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `ep93xx_wdt_init': > clkdev.c:(.init.text+0x2bd8): undefined reference to > `watchdog_register_device' > make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1
Of course.
I wasn't sure how Wim wanted to handle this. I see two ways of doing it in the Kconfig.
1) Each driver config option has a select WATCHDOG_CORE if it is required.
Pro: all the watchdog drivers (that are available) are displayed Con: each driver needs to add the select if needed Side-effect: the WATCHDOG_CORE option could (should) be a hidden option
2) Separate the watchdog drivers into groups that need the WATCHDOG_CORE and those that don't then put a if WATCHDOG_CORE/endif around the ones that need it.
Pro: keeps the Kconfig clean Con: the drivers that use WATCHDOG_CORE are not displayed unless the option is selected Con: defconfigs probably will need to be updated to select WATCHDOG_CORE
Wim, do you have any opinion on this?
> Other than that, you can also add my > > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@iki.fi> > > if you like.
Thanks, Hartley
| |