All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To: Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com
Cc: wim@linux-watchdog.org, linux@roeck-us.net, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: introduce sam9x60 watchdog timer driver
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 12:23:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191002102343.GL4106@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1570001371-8174-2-git-send-email-eugen.hristev@microchip.com>

Hi,

On 02/10/2019 07:35:26+0000, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
> +static void wdt_write(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt, u32 field, u32 val)
> +{
> +	/*
> +	 * WDT_CR and WDT_MR must not be modified within three slow clock
> +	 * periods following a restart of the watchdog performed by a write
> +	 * access in WDT_CR.
> +	 */
> +	while (time_before(jiffies, wdt->last_ping + WDT_DELAY))
> +		usleep_range(30, 125);
> +	writel_relaxed(val, wdt->reg_base + field);
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +}
> +
> +static void wdt_write_nosleep(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt, u32 field, u32 val)
> +{
> +	if (time_before(jiffies, wdt->last_ping + WDT_DELAY))
> +		usleep_range(123, 250);

So you have a _nosleep function that does sleep?

> +	writel_relaxed(val, wdt->reg_base + field);
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_start(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt->mr &= ~AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +	wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IER, wdt->ir);

I don't think AT91_WDT_IER needs to be protected, you can probably write
it directly. Also, you certainly need to do that before starting the
watchdog to avoid race conditions.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_stop(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +	wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IDR, wdt->ir);
> +

I don't think AT91_WDT_IDR needs to be protected.

> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_ping(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_CR, AT91_WDT_KEY | AT91_WDT_WDRSTT);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd,
> +				   unsigned int timeout)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_WLR,
> +		  AT91_WDT_SET_COUNTER(WDT_SEC2TICKS(timeout)));
> +

I don't think AT91_WDT_WLR needs to be protected.

> +	wdd->timeout = timeout;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct watchdog_info sam9x60_wdt_info = {
> +	.options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING,
> +	.identity = "Microchip SAM9X60 Watchdog",
> +};
> +
> +static const struct watchdog_ops sam9x60_wdt_ops = {
> +	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +	.start = sam9x60_wdt_start,
> +	.stop = sam9x60_wdt_stop,
> +	.ping = sam9x60_wdt_ping,
> +	.set_timeout = sam9x60_wdt_set_timeout,
> +};
> +
> +static irqreturn_t sam9x60_wdt_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = platform_get_drvdata(dev_id);
> +
> +	if (wdt_read(wdt, AT91_WDT_ISR)) {
> +		pr_crit("Microchip Watchdog Software Reset\n");
> +		emergency_restart();
> +		pr_crit("Reboot didn't succeed\n");
> +	}

I'm not really convinced by the software restart use case but I guess it
is to be able to shut down while still flushing data to the storage.
This would not protect against kernel issues then.

> +
> +	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +static int of_sam9x60_wdt_init(struct device_node *np, struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> +	const char *tmp;
> +
> +	wdt->mr = AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +
> +	if (!of_property_read_string(np, "atmel,watchdog-type", &tmp) &&
> +	    !strcmp(tmp, "software"))
> +		wdt->ir = AT91_WDT_PERINT;
> +	else
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_PERIODRST;
> +
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,idle-halt"))
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDIDLEHLT;
> +
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,dbg-halt"))
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDDBGHLT;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_init(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> +	u32 reg;
> +	/*
> +	 * When booting and resuming, the bootloader may have changed the
> +	 * watchdog configuration.
> +	 * If the watchdog is already running, we can safely update it.
> +	 * Else, we have to disable it properly.
> +	 */
> +	if (wdt_enabled) {
> +		wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +		wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IER, wdt->ir);
> +		wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_WLR,
> +			  AT91_WDT_SET_COUNTER(WDT_SEC2TICKS(WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT)));
> +
> +	} else {
> +		reg = wdt_read(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR);
> +		if (!(reg & AT91_WDT_WDDIS))
> +			wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR,
> +					  reg | AT91_WDT_WDDIS);
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct watchdog_device *wdd;
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt;
> +	struct resource *res;
> +	void __iomem *regs;
> +	u32 irq = 0;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	wdt = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*wdt), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!wdt)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	wdd = &wdt->wdd;
> +	wdd->timeout = WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdd->info = &sam9x60_wdt_info;
> +	wdd->ops = &sam9x60_wdt_ops;
> +	wdd->min_timeout = MIN_WDT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdd->max_timeout = MAX_WDT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +
> +	watchdog_set_drvdata(wdd, wdt);
> +
> +	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> +	regs = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +	if (IS_ERR(regs))
> +		return PTR_ERR(regs);
> +
> +	wdt->reg_base = regs;
> +
> +	irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(pdev->dev.of_node, 0);
> +	if (!irq)
> +		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "failed to get IRQ from DT\n");
> +
> +	ret = of_sam9x60_wdt_init(pdev->dev.of_node, wdt);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	if ((wdt->ir & AT91_WDT_PERINT) && irq) {
> +		ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, sam9x60_wdt_irq_handler,
> +				       IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_IRQPOLL |
> +				       IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, pdev->name, pdev);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> +				"cannot register interrupt handler\n");
> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, wdt_timeout, &pdev->dev);
> +
> +	ret = sam9x60_wdt_init(wdt);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, nowayout);
> +
> +	ret = watchdog_register_device(wdd);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register watchdog device\n");
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, wdt);
> +
> +	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "initialized (timeout = %d sec, nowayout = %d)\n",
> +		 wdd->timeout, nowayout);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +	sam9x60_wdt_stop(&wdt->wdd);
> +
> +	watchdog_unregister_device(&wdt->wdd);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id sam9x60_wdt_of_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "microchip,sam9x60-wdt", },
> +	{ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sam9x60_wdt_of_match);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP

Most of the logic has been copy/pasted from sama5d4_wdt.c and this
already miss some improvement that have been made between the time you
copied it and now.

Are you sure both drivers shouldn't be merged? I feel like this will be a
maintenance hell if we don't do that now.

> +static int sam9x60_wdt_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * FIXME: writing MR also pings the watchdog which may not be desired.
> +	 * This should only be done when the registers are lost on suspend but
> +	 * there is no way to get this information right now.
> +	 */
> +	sam9x60_wdt_init(wdt);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(sam9x60_wdt_pm_ops, NULL,
> +			 sam9x60_wdt_resume);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver sam9x60_wdt_driver = {
> +	.probe		= sam9x60_wdt_probe,
> +	.remove		= sam9x60_wdt_remove,
> +	.driver		= {
> +		.name	= "sam9x60_wdt",
> +		.pm	= &sam9x60_wdt_pm_ops,
> +		.of_match_table = sam9x60_wdt_of_match,
> +	}
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(sam9x60_wdt_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Eugen Hristev");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Microchip SAM9X60 Watchdog Timer driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To: Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, wim@linux-watchdog.org,
	linux@roeck-us.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: introduce sam9x60 watchdog timer driver
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 12:23:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191002102343.GL4106@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1570001371-8174-2-git-send-email-eugen.hristev@microchip.com>

Hi,

On 02/10/2019 07:35:26+0000, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
> +static void wdt_write(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt, u32 field, u32 val)
> +{
> +	/*
> +	 * WDT_CR and WDT_MR must not be modified within three slow clock
> +	 * periods following a restart of the watchdog performed by a write
> +	 * access in WDT_CR.
> +	 */
> +	while (time_before(jiffies, wdt->last_ping + WDT_DELAY))
> +		usleep_range(30, 125);
> +	writel_relaxed(val, wdt->reg_base + field);
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +}
> +
> +static void wdt_write_nosleep(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt, u32 field, u32 val)
> +{
> +	if (time_before(jiffies, wdt->last_ping + WDT_DELAY))
> +		usleep_range(123, 250);

So you have a _nosleep function that does sleep?

> +	writel_relaxed(val, wdt->reg_base + field);
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_start(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt->mr &= ~AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +	wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IER, wdt->ir);

I don't think AT91_WDT_IER needs to be protected, you can probably write
it directly. Also, you certainly need to do that before starting the
watchdog to avoid race conditions.

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_stop(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +	wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IDR, wdt->ir);
> +

I don't think AT91_WDT_IDR needs to be protected.

> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_ping(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_CR, AT91_WDT_KEY | AT91_WDT_WDRSTT);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd,
> +				   unsigned int timeout)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
> +
> +	wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_WLR,
> +		  AT91_WDT_SET_COUNTER(WDT_SEC2TICKS(timeout)));
> +

I don't think AT91_WDT_WLR needs to be protected.

> +	wdd->timeout = timeout;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct watchdog_info sam9x60_wdt_info = {
> +	.options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING,
> +	.identity = "Microchip SAM9X60 Watchdog",
> +};
> +
> +static const struct watchdog_ops sam9x60_wdt_ops = {
> +	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +	.start = sam9x60_wdt_start,
> +	.stop = sam9x60_wdt_stop,
> +	.ping = sam9x60_wdt_ping,
> +	.set_timeout = sam9x60_wdt_set_timeout,
> +};
> +
> +static irqreturn_t sam9x60_wdt_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = platform_get_drvdata(dev_id);
> +
> +	if (wdt_read(wdt, AT91_WDT_ISR)) {
> +		pr_crit("Microchip Watchdog Software Reset\n");
> +		emergency_restart();
> +		pr_crit("Reboot didn't succeed\n");
> +	}

I'm not really convinced by the software restart use case but I guess it
is to be able to shut down while still flushing data to the storage.
This would not protect against kernel issues then.

> +
> +	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
> +
> +static int of_sam9x60_wdt_init(struct device_node *np, struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> +	const char *tmp;
> +
> +	wdt->mr = AT91_WDT_WDDIS;
> +
> +	if (!of_property_read_string(np, "atmel,watchdog-type", &tmp) &&
> +	    !strcmp(tmp, "software"))
> +		wdt->ir = AT91_WDT_PERINT;
> +	else
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_PERIODRST;
> +
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,idle-halt"))
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDIDLEHLT;
> +
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,dbg-halt"))
> +		wdt->mr |= AT91_WDT_WDDBGHLT;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_init(struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> +	u32 reg;
> +	/*
> +	 * When booting and resuming, the bootloader may have changed the
> +	 * watchdog configuration.
> +	 * If the watchdog is already running, we can safely update it.
> +	 * Else, we have to disable it properly.
> +	 */
> +	if (wdt_enabled) {
> +		wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR, wdt->mr);
> +		wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_IER, wdt->ir);
> +		wdt_write(wdt, AT91_WDT_WLR,
> +			  AT91_WDT_SET_COUNTER(WDT_SEC2TICKS(WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT)));
> +
> +	} else {
> +		reg = wdt_read(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR);
> +		if (!(reg & AT91_WDT_WDDIS))
> +			wdt_write_nosleep(wdt, AT91_WDT_MR,
> +					  reg | AT91_WDT_WDDIS);
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct watchdog_device *wdd;
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt;
> +	struct resource *res;
> +	void __iomem *regs;
> +	u32 irq = 0;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	wdt = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*wdt), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!wdt)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	wdd = &wdt->wdd;
> +	wdd->timeout = WDT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdd->info = &sam9x60_wdt_info;
> +	wdd->ops = &sam9x60_wdt_ops;
> +	wdd->min_timeout = MIN_WDT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdd->max_timeout = MAX_WDT_TIMEOUT;
> +	wdt->last_ping = jiffies;
> +
> +	watchdog_set_drvdata(wdd, wdt);
> +
> +	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> +	regs = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +	if (IS_ERR(regs))
> +		return PTR_ERR(regs);
> +
> +	wdt->reg_base = regs;
> +
> +	irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(pdev->dev.of_node, 0);
> +	if (!irq)
> +		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "failed to get IRQ from DT\n");
> +
> +	ret = of_sam9x60_wdt_init(pdev->dev.of_node, wdt);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	if ((wdt->ir & AT91_WDT_PERINT) && irq) {
> +		ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, sam9x60_wdt_irq_handler,
> +				       IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_IRQPOLL |
> +				       IRQF_NO_SUSPEND, pdev->name, pdev);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> +				"cannot register interrupt handler\n");
> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, wdt_timeout, &pdev->dev);
> +
> +	ret = sam9x60_wdt_init(wdt);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, nowayout);
> +
> +	ret = watchdog_register_device(wdd);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register watchdog device\n");
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, wdt);
> +
> +	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "initialized (timeout = %d sec, nowayout = %d)\n",
> +		 wdd->timeout, nowayout);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sam9x60_wdt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +	sam9x60_wdt_stop(&wdt->wdd);
> +
> +	watchdog_unregister_device(&wdt->wdd);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id sam9x60_wdt_of_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "microchip,sam9x60-wdt", },
> +	{ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sam9x60_wdt_of_match);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP

Most of the logic has been copy/pasted from sama5d4_wdt.c and this
already miss some improvement that have been made between the time you
copied it and now.

Are you sure both drivers shouldn't be merged? I feel like this will be a
maintenance hell if we don't do that now.

> +static int sam9x60_wdt_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct sam9x60_wdt *wdt = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * FIXME: writing MR also pings the watchdog which may not be desired.
> +	 * This should only be done when the registers are lost on suspend but
> +	 * there is no way to get this information right now.
> +	 */
> +	sam9x60_wdt_init(wdt);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(sam9x60_wdt_pm_ops, NULL,
> +			 sam9x60_wdt_resume);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver sam9x60_wdt_driver = {
> +	.probe		= sam9x60_wdt_probe,
> +	.remove		= sam9x60_wdt_remove,
> +	.driver		= {
> +		.name	= "sam9x60_wdt",
> +		.pm	= &sam9x60_wdt_pm_ops,
> +		.of_match_table = sam9x60_wdt_of_match,
> +	}
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(sam9x60_wdt_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Eugen Hristev");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Microchip SAM9X60 Watchdog Timer driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-02 10:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-02  7:35 [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: add bindings Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02  7:35 ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02  7:35 ` [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: introduce sam9x60 watchdog timer driver Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02  7:35   ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 10:23   ` Alexandre Belloni [this message]
2019-10-02 10:23     ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-02 11:07     ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 11:07       ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 11:07       ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 13:16   ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-07  7:58     ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-07  7:58       ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-07 12:36       ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-07 13:14         ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-07 13:14           ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-07 14:17           ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-07 14:17             ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-07 14:17             ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 13:38   ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-02 13:38     ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-02 13:38     ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-02  7:35 ` [PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINERS: add sam9x60_wdt Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02  7:35   ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02  9:56 ` [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: add bindings Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-02  9:56   ` Alexandre Belloni

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=20191002102343.GL4106@piout.net \
    --to=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com \
    --cc=Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=wim@linux-watchdog.org \
    /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.