From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] watchdog: Add API to trigger reboots
Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 23:27:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140505042726.GF11606@lukather> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140503042925.GB5882@roeck-us.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1909 bytes --]
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 09:29:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > + if (wdd->ops->reboot)
> > > + wdd_reboot_dev = wdd;
> > > +
> >
> > Overall, it looks really great, but I guess we can make it a
> > list. Otherwise, we might end up in a situation where we could not
> > reboot anymore, like this one for example:
> > - a first watchdog is probed, registers a reboot function
> > - a second watchdog is probed, registers a reboot function that
> > overwrites the first one.
> > - then, the second watchdog disappears for some reason, and the
> > reboot is set to NULL
> >
> I thought about that, but how likely (or unlikely) is that to ever happen ?
> So I figured it is not worth the effort, and would just add complexity without
> real gain. We could always add the list later if we ever encounter a situation
> where two watchdogs in the same system provide a reboot callback.
The A31 we were discussing about in the other thread that doesn't have
a watchdog driver yet has four, identical, watchogs. I'm not really
concerned about the mentionned issue, since they will never be
removed, but the situation might happen with an on-SoC watchdog and an
i2c one (if that even exists).
But yes, right, that can be postponed.
> > Or maybe we can just use the start callback, with the min timeout already
> > registered, and prevent the user to kick the watchdog.
> >
> Doesn't always work, unfortunately, even now. The moxart driver causes
> an explicit and immediate reset. Also, some watchdogs don't reset the system
> directly but get an interrupt, which then calls the reset handler. Which,
> in our case, would call the start callback again, and you would have an endless
> loop.
Ok. You have my Acked-by then.
Thanks!
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/5] watchdog: Add API to trigger reboots
Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 23:27:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140505042726.GF11606@lukather> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140503042925.GB5882@roeck-us.net>
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 09:29:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > + if (wdd->ops->reboot)
> > > + wdd_reboot_dev = wdd;
> > > +
> >
> > Overall, it looks really great, but I guess we can make it a
> > list. Otherwise, we might end up in a situation where we could not
> > reboot anymore, like this one for example:
> > - a first watchdog is probed, registers a reboot function
> > - a second watchdog is probed, registers a reboot function that
> > overwrites the first one.
> > - then, the second watchdog disappears for some reason, and the
> > reboot is set to NULL
> >
> I thought about that, but how likely (or unlikely) is that to ever happen ?
> So I figured it is not worth the effort, and would just add complexity without
> real gain. We could always add the list later if we ever encounter a situation
> where two watchdogs in the same system provide a reboot callback.
The A31 we were discussing about in the other thread that doesn't have
a watchdog driver yet has four, identical, watchogs. I'm not really
concerned about the mentionned issue, since they will never be
removed, but the situation might happen with an on-SoC watchdog and an
i2c one (if that even exists).
But yes, right, that can be postponed.
> > Or maybe we can just use the start callback, with the min timeout already
> > registered, and prevent the user to kick the watchdog.
> >
> Doesn't always work, unfortunately, even now. The moxart driver causes
> an explicit and immediate reset. Also, some watchdogs don't reset the system
> directly but get an interrupt, which then calls the reset handler. Which,
> in our case, would call the start callback again, and you would have an endless
> loop.
Ok. You have my Acked-by then.
Thanks!
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140504/399fa054/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-05 4:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-01 15:41 [RFC PATCH 0/5] watchdog: Add reboot API Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] watchdog: Add API to trigger reboots Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-02 10:01 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-02 10:01 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-02 13:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-02 13:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-03 1:22 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-03 1:22 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-03 4:29 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-03 4:29 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-05 4:27 ` Maxime Ripard [this message]
2014-05-05 4:27 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 11:52 ` Lucas Stach
2014-05-07 11:52 ` Lucas Stach
2014-05-07 13:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-07 13:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-07 15:49 ` Lucas Stach
2014-05-07 15:49 ` Lucas Stach
2014-05-07 19:15 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-07 19:15 ` Maxime Ripard
2014-05-05 18:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-05-05 18:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-05-05 19:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-05 19:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] arm64: Support reboot through watchdog subsystem Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] arm: " Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] watchdog: moxart: Register reboot handler with " Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] watchdog: sunxi: " Guenter Roeck
2014-05-01 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-05-05 18:26 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] watchdog: Add reboot API Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-05 18:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-06 14:29 ` Jonas Jensen
2014-05-06 14:29 ` Jonas Jensen
2014-05-07 11:01 ` Heiko Stübner
2014-05-07 11:01 ` Heiko Stübner
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=20140505042726.GF11606@lukather \
--to=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jonas.jensen@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.