From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>
Subject: Intel MID vs. Intel SCU watchdog
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:16:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140421181652.GA31616@roeck-us.net> (raw)
Hi,
with the recent submission of an Intel MID watchdog driver, we now have
config INTEL_SCU_WATCHDOG
bool "Intel SCU Watchdog for Mobile Platforms"
depends on X86_INTEL_MID
---help---
Hardware driver for the watchdog time built into the Intel SCU
for Intel Mobile Platforms.
config INTEL_MID_WATCHDOG
tristate "Intel MID Watchdog Timer"
depends on X86_INTEL_MID
--help--
Watchdog timer driver built into the Intel SCU for Intel MID Platforms.
This driver currently supports only the watchdog evolution
implementation in SCU, available for Merrifield generation.
Furthermore, in the SCU watchdog driver initialization code, we have
...
* If it isn't an intel MID device then it doesn't have this watchdog
*/
if (!intel_mid_identify_cpu())
return -ENODEV;
I must admit I find this very confusing. Both watchdogs have the same
dependencies. The MID watchdog driver only instantiates for Tangier,
while the SCU watchdog driver instantiates for all MID CPUs (specfically
including Tangier, but also Penwell and Cloverview and, from earlier
commit logs, Moorsetown).
I understand I was told earlier that the supported devices would be
"sufficiently different" to warrant separate drivers, but this doesn't
really make sense to me, at least not without further explanation.
Can someone please clarify which driver is supposed to work on which device,
and why there are now two watchdog drivers for Tangier (or at least two
watchdog drivers which instantiate on Tangier) ? Does the SCU driver work
on Tangier, or does it not ? If not, why is there no code in the SCU driver
which would cause it to fail to instantiate on Tangier, and why is this
limitation not mentioned in Kconfig ? If yes, why do we need separate drivers
in the first place ?
Thanks,
Guenter
next reply other threads:[~2014-04-21 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-21 18:16 Guenter Roeck [this message]
2014-04-21 19:51 ` Intel MID vs. Intel SCU watchdog David Cohen
2014-04-21 20:05 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-04-21 20:15 ` David Cohen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140421181652.GA31616@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eric.ernst@intel.com \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.