Re: [PATCH 1/5] watchdog: sync linux-omap changes

[Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>]

You're getting there with this patch, but still not completely up to
snuff.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:32:35PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
> index 3a11dad..e55f2cc 100644
> --- a/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/omap_wdt.c
> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  #include <linux/moduleparam.h>
>  #include <linux/clk.h>
> +
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
>  #include <linux/uaccess.h>

This hunk is unnecessary.

> @@ -218,19 +240,18 @@ static long omap_wdt_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
>  			return -EFAULT;
>  		omap_wdt_adjust_timeout(new_margin);
>  
> -		spin_lock(&wdt_lock);
> -		omap_wdt_disable();
> -		omap_wdt_set_timeout();
> -		omap_wdt_enable();
> +		omap_wdt_disable(wdev);
> +		omap_wdt_set_timeout(wdev);
> +		omap_wdt_enable(wdev);
>  
> -		omap_wdt_ping();
> -		spin_unlock(&wdt_lock);
> +		omap_wdt_ping(wdev);

This is removing the spin lock which should remain.

>  		/* Fall */
>  	case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT:
>  		return put_user(timer_margin, (int __user *)arg);
>  	default:
>  		return -ENOTTY;
>  	}
> +	return 0;

And this return statement shouldn't be required.

Apart from those three points, nice work.