From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Timo Kokkonen <timo.kokkonen@offcode.fi>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com, nicolas.ferre@atmel.com,
alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com
Cc: Wenyou.Yang@atmel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv8 04/10] watchdog: core: Allow extending early timeout
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 18:16:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <555BE072.5090603@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1432023969-20736-5-git-send-email-timo.kokkonen@offcode.fi>
On 05/19/2015 01:26 AM, Timo Kokkonen wrote:
> It is possible that the specified watchdog timeout value is shorter
> than the time it takes for the watchdog daemon to start up and take
> over the watchdog device. This is problem if WATCHDOG_BOOT_RUNNING is
> the desired watchdog policy.
>
> Add a new timeout value that specifies how long kernel should extend
> the timeout by pinging the watchdog hardware. This option still
> ensures a watchdog reset takes place in case watchdog daemon fails to
> open the device, but gives more freedom in case user space is slow
> starting up and watchdog might trigger prematurely.
>
Same as my other comment. This should not be a configuration option
(just like the default timeout isn't one).
I really think we are going into the wrong direction. I can understand
the point why it makes sense to have a devicetree parameter for this,
and we should focus (have focused) on getting it accepted. Now we have
to deal with kernel configuration options, and we get more and more
distracted from the real goal.
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv8 04/10] watchdog: core: Allow extending early timeout
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 18:16:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <555BE072.5090603@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1432023969-20736-5-git-send-email-timo.kokkonen@offcode.fi>
On 05/19/2015 01:26 AM, Timo Kokkonen wrote:
> It is possible that the specified watchdog timeout value is shorter
> than the time it takes for the watchdog daemon to start up and take
> over the watchdog device. This is problem if WATCHDOG_BOOT_RUNNING is
> the desired watchdog policy.
>
> Add a new timeout value that specifies how long kernel should extend
> the timeout by pinging the watchdog hardware. This option still
> ensures a watchdog reset takes place in case watchdog daemon fails to
> open the device, but gives more freedom in case user space is slow
> starting up and watchdog might trigger prematurely.
>
Same as my other comment. This should not be a configuration option
(just like the default timeout isn't one).
I really think we are going into the wrong direction. I can understand
the point why it makes sense to have a devicetree parameter for this,
and we should focus (have focused) on getting it accepted. Now we have
to deal with kernel configuration options, and we get more and more
distracted from the real goal.
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-20 1:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-19 8:25 [PATCHv8 00/10] watchdog: Extend kernel API and add early_timeout_sec feature Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:25 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 01/10] watchdog: Rename watchdog_active to watchdog_hw_active Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 1:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 1:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 5:37 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 5:37 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 13:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 13:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-29 12:43 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-29 12:43 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 02/10] watchdog: core: Ping watchdog on behalf of user space when needed Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 1:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 1:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 6:18 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 6:18 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 03/10] watchdog: core: Introduce default watchdog policy Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 1:13 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 1:13 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-20 5:45 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 5:45 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 04/10] watchdog: core: Allow extending early timeout Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-20 1:16 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2015-05-20 1:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 05/10] Documentation/watchdog: Document watchdog core API changes Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 06/10] devicetree: Document generic watchdog properties Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 07/10] Documentation/watchdog: watchdog-test.c: Add support for changing timeout Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 08/10] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: Convert to use new watchdog core extensions Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 09/10] watchdog: imx2_wdt: Convert to use new " Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` [PATCHv8 10/10] watchdog: omap_wdt: " Timo Kokkonen
2015-05-19 8:26 ` Timo Kokkonen
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=555BE072.5090603@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=Wenyou.Yang@atmel.com \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=timo.kokkonen@offcode.fi \
/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.