[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: R: [PATCH v1] watchdog: wdat: add param. to start wdog on module insertion
Hi Guenter

> >>> const struct wdat_instruction *instr, u32 *value) { @@ -437,6
> >>> +443,8 @@ static int wdat_wdt_probe(struct platform_device
> >> *pdev)
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> wdat_wdt_boot_status(wdat);
> >>> + if (start_enabled)
> >>> + wdat_wdt_start(&wdat->wdd);
> >>
> >> No objections to this if it is really needed. However, I think it is
> >> better start the watchdog after devm_watchdog_register_device() has
> >> been called so we have everything initialized.
> >
> > Yes, it is needed. We need this feature to enable the watchdog as soon
> > as possible and this is essential for unmanned applications, such as
> > routers, water pumping stations, climate data collections, etc.
> >
> FWIW, in your use case the watchdog should be enabled in the

Yes, you are right, with the new BIOS version for the new boards
we'll implement this features, but for the old boards it is no more possible.

> > Right, ok for the correct positioning of the wdat_wdt_start function
> > at the end of the watchdog device initialization. Thanks!
> >
> No, it isn't, because it won't set WDOG_HW_RUNNING, and the watchdog
> core won't know that the watchdog is running.


> The watchdog has to be started before the call to wdat_wdt_set_running().
> If that isn't possible with the current location of wdat_wdt_set_running(),
> then
> wdat_wdt_set_running() has to be moved accordingly.
> Either case, both have to be called before calling
> devm_watchdog_register_device().


> Having said that, I'd prefer to have a module parameter in the watchdog
> core. We already have a number of similar module parameters in various
> drivers, all named differently, and I'd rather not have more.

Ok, I'll study how to introduce a this new parameter in the wdog core,
so that it can be available for all watchdog drivers.
Then we'll have to think what to do with the existent similar parameters.
I think we have to keep them for compatibility reasons.

> Guenter

 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-22 12:31    [W:0.043 / U:4.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site