Re: [RFC PATCH v5 10/10] watchdog: bd70528: Initial support for ROHM BD70528 watchdog block

[Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 06:38:43AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 2/4/19 4:49 AM, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > Initial support for watchdog block included in ROHM BD70528
> > power management IC.
> > 
> > Configurations for low power states are still to be checked.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/watchdog/Kconfig       |  12 +++
> >   drivers/watchdog/Makefile      |   1 +
> >   drivers/watchdog/bd70528_wdt.c | 187 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   3 files changed, 200 insertions(+)
> >   create mode 100644 drivers/watchdog/bd70528_wdt.c
> > 
> > +
> > +struct wdtbd70528 {
> > +	struct device *dev;
> > +	struct regmap *regmap;
> > +	struct mutex *rtc_lock;
> > +	struct watchdog_device wdt;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set_locked(struct wdtbd70528 *w, int enable)
> > +{
> > +	struct bd70528 *bd70528;
> > +
> > +	bd70528 = container_of(w->rtc_lock, struct bd70528, rtc_timer_lock);
> > +	return bd70528->wdt_set(bd70528, enable, NULL);
> > +}
> 
> Please add an empty line here.

Ok. 

> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set(struct wdtbd70528 *w, int enable)
> > +{
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +	ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, enable);
> > +	mutex_unlock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_start(struct watchdog_device *wdt)
> > +{
> > +	struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > +	dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT ping...\n");
> > +	return bd70528_wdt_set(w, 1);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_stop(struct watchdog_device *wdt)
> > +{
> > +	struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > +	dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT stopping...\n");
> > +	return bd70528_wdt_set(w, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdt,
> > +				    unsigned int timeout)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int hours;
> > +	unsigned int minutes;
> > +	unsigned int seconds;
> > +	int ret;
> > +	struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > +	seconds = timeout;
> > +	hours = timeout / (60 * 60);
> > +	/* Maximum timeout is 1h 59m 59s => hours is 1 or 0 */
> > +	if (hours)
> > +		seconds -= (60 * 60);
> > +	minutes = seconds / 60;
> > +	seconds = seconds % 60;
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > +	ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, 0);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto out_unlock;
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_HOUR,
> > +				 BD70528_MASK_WDT_HOUR, hours);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT hours\n");
> > +		goto out_en_unlock;
> > +	}
> > +	ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_MINUTE,
> > +				 BD70528_MASK_WDT_MINUTE, bin2bcd(minutes));
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT minutes\n");
> > +		goto out_en_unlock;
> > +	}
> > +	ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_SEC,
> > +				 BD70528_MASK_WDT_SEC, bin2bcd(seconds));
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT seconds\n");
> > +	else
> > +		dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT tmo set to %u\n", timeout);
> > +
> > +out_en_unlock:
> > +	ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, 1);
> > +out_unlock:
> > +	mutex_unlock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct watchdog_info bd70528_wdt_info = {
> > +	.identity = "bd70528-wdt",
> > +	.options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING | WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct watchdog_ops bd70528_wdt_ops = {
> > +	.start		= bd70528_wdt_start,
> > +	.stop		= bd70528_wdt_stop,
> > +	.set_timeout	= bd70528_wdt_set_timeout,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* Max time we can set is 1 hour, 59 minutes and 59 seconds */
> > +#define WDT_MAX_MS ((2 * 60 * 60 - 1) * 1000)
> > +/* Minimum time is 1 second */
> > +#define WDT_MIN_MS 1000
> > +#define DEFAULT_TIMEOUT 60
> > +
> 
> Please move to top, and tab-align the values.

Ok.

> Otherwise I am ok with the patch.
> 
> On a side note, isn't it past time to drop the RFC ?

Well, the two main things for me to send this as RFC were the
regmap-irq change (which I had already discussed with Mark, and which is
now applied already - so that's Ok) and splitting the existing
include/linux/mfd/rohm-bd718x7.h header (patches 1 - 3). I hoped to get
commnts from Lee, Stephen and Mark for the idea of header split (this
impacts to already submitted bd718x7 driver and I was unsure if this good
or bad approach) but I haven't heard of Lee or Stephen yet.

Still, I have now received acks for dt-bindings, regulators, gpio and
now also for wdt - and I don't think these are heavily impacted even if
the header split was not Ok - so I guess dropping the RFC makes sense.
Thanks for pointing that out.

I'll send v6 with changes you suggested here and drop the RFC.

Br,
	Matti Vaittinen

-- 
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND

~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes.  Just then, he vanished ~~~