Messages in this thread | | | From | Andrey Smirnov <> | Date | Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:41:28 -0700 | Subject | Re: [v9,4/5] watchdog: Add RAVE SP watchdog driver |
| |
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:04:20PM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: >> This driver provides access to RAVE SP watchdog functionality. >> >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: cphealy@gmail.com >> Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> >> Cc: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@cogentembedded.com> >> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> >> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> >> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> >> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> >> Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> >> Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> >> Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> >> Signed-off-by: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@cogentembedded.com> >> Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> >> --- >> >> Guenter: >> >> In our previous discussion you noted that relying on the state of >> WDOG_HW_RUNNING was not correct (that should be fixed now), please let >> me know if using watchdog_hw_running() the way I do in >> rave_sp_wdt_set_timeout() is incorrect as well. >> > > You could as well have used watchdog_active(), but it is ok. >
That's easy to change. I'll do that in v10.
>> Thanks, >> Andrey Smirnov >> >> drivers/watchdog/Kconfig | 7 + >> drivers/watchdog/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/watchdog/rave-sp-wdt.c | 343 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 351 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/watchdog/rave-sp-wdt.c >> > [ ... ] > >> + >> +static int rave_sp_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + const struct of_device_id *id; >> + struct watchdog_device *wdd; >> + struct rave_sp_wdt *sp_wd; >> + struct nvmem_cell *cell; >> + __le16 timeout = 0; >> + int ret; >> + >> + id = of_match_device(rave_sp_wdt_variants, dev->parent); >> + if (WARN_ON(!id)) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + > > I could understand an error message here, but why a traceback ? >
I can't think of a good reason for it. I'll change this to a regular error message in v10.
Thanks, Andrey Smirnov
| |