Re: [PATCH] ppc44x/watchdog: Select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT option

[Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>]

On 07/15/2012 09:07 PM, Lu.Jiang wrote:
> =E4=BA=8E 2012=E5=B9=B407=E6=9C=8813=E6=97=A5 19:50, Kumar Gala =E5=86=99=
=E9=81=93:
>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 9:44 PM, Jiang Lu wrote:
>>
>>> On PPC44x core, the WRC(Watchdog-timer Reset Control) field of TCR
>>> of timer can not reset by software after set to a non-zero value.
>>> Which means software can not reset the timeout behaviour of watchdog
>>> timer.
>>>
>>> This patch selects WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT option for 44x platforms to
>>> indicate the watchdog timer can not be disabled once fired.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Lu <lu.jiang@windriver.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/watchdog/Kconfig |    1 +
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> I believe this is not 44x specific, but how Book-E watchdog is
>> architected.
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> index 3709624..41f3dff 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> @@ -1084,6 +1084,7 @@ config PIKA_WDT
>>> config BOOKE_WDT
>>>     tristate "PowerPC Book-E Watchdog Timer"
>>>     depends on BOOKE || 4xx
>>> +    select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT if 44x
>> This should probably be 'select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT if BOOKE'
>=20
> On ppc44x's processor, if we disabled 'WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT ' option. The
> driver's release routine will try to disable the watchdog , by clearing
> the WIE & WTDP field in TCR.
> Since the ppc44x's watch dog can not reset by software, such operation
> only set the timeout value(WDTP) to minimum, and cause the system reboo=
t
> immediately.
>=20
> I checked ppc 476, 405 & 450's manual, these document said the
> WRC(Watchdog-timer Reset Control) field of TCR of timer
> can not reset by software after set to a non-zero value. I think all
> ppc44x core should got same limitation.

This is (supposed to be) true on FSL e500 as well.

> While on FSL's platform, we did not met such issue.

You tested this and were able to clear WRC on an e500-based chip?  Which
one?

-Scott