[PATCH v4 1/5] watchdog: davinci: change driver to use WDT core

[linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck)]

On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:42:31PM +0200, ivan.khoronzhuk wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 08:28 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 11:34:46PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> >> On 11/27/2013 6:18 PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> >>> To reduce code duplicate and increase code readability use WDT core
> >>> code to handle WDT interface.
> >>>
> >>> Remove io_lock as the WDT core uses mutex to lock each wdt device.
> >>> Remove wdt_state as the WDT core tracks state with its own variable.
> >>>
> >>> The watchdog_init_timeout() can read timeout value from timeout-sec
> >>> property if the passed value is out of bounds. The heartbeat is
> >>> initialized in next way. If heartbeat is not set thought module
> >>> parameter, try to read it's value from WDT node timeout-sec property.
> >>> If node has no one, use default value.
> >>>
> >>> The heartbeat is hold in wdd->timeout by WDT core, so use it in
> >>> order to set timeout period.
> >>>
> >>> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@ti.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>   drivers/watchdog/Kconfig       |    2 +
> >>>   drivers/watchdog/davinci_wdt.c |  147 ++++++++++------------------------------
> >>>   2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
> >>> index 5be6e91..eb8c89d 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
> >>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
> >>> @@ -271,6 +271,8 @@ config IOP_WATCHDOG
> >>>   config DAVINCI_WATCHDOG
> >>>   	tristate "DaVinci watchdog"
> >>>   	depends on ARCH_DAVINCI
> >>> +	select WATCHDOG_CORE
> >>> +	select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT
> >>
> >> Its not clear for change log why NOWAYOUT needs to be forced on all the
> >> time for all users of DaVinci watchdog.
> 
> ... you are right
> 
> >>
> > Actually, thinking about it, it is not necessary and can be replaced with
> > 
> > 	watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, 1);
> 
> Good idea, I'll replace watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT) on it.
> And delete "select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT"
> 
> > 
> > In other words, there is no need to force NOWAYOUT on _other_ watchdogs which
> > may be present in the system. Still, you are right, it would be nice to explain
> > in the changelog (or maybe even better as comment in the code) why it is
> > enforced.
> > 
> > Guenter
> > 
> 
> Only question, should I repost only this patch or whole series?
> 
Reposting only this patch should be sufficient if the others did not change.

Thanks,
Guenter