Re: AT91SAM9/CAP9 watchdog driver

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 18:40:46 +0200
"Andrew Victor" <avictor.za@gmail.com> wrote:

> +static int __init at91wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	int res;
> +
> +	if (at91wdt_miscdev.parent)
> +		return -EBUSY;
> +	at91wdt_miscdev.parent = &pdev->dev;
> +
> +	res = misc_register(&at91wdt_miscdev);
> +	if (res)
> +		return res;
> +
> +	/* Set watchdog */
> +	if (at91_wdt_settimeout(wdt_timeout) == -EINVAL) {
> +		pr_info("at91sam9_wdt: timeout must be between 1 and %d.\n",
> +			WDT_MAX_TIME);

Would printk(KERN_ERR be more appropriate here?

> +		return 0;

That looks like the wrong return value?

> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}