From: bgat@billgatliff.com (Bill Gatliff)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] watchdog: Add support for the Avionic Design Xanthos watchdog timer.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:32:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A9733C9.9090900@billgatliff.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090827204448.GL29382@infomag.iguana.be>
Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
>
>>> This is the only thing I'm still struggling with: the goal of a watchdog device driver is to make sure that the system reboots when the system isn't stable anymore. So why should you then trigger the interrupt?
>>>
>>>
>> ... because a hard reboot might not be the way he wants to resolve the
>> situation.
>>
>
> If your system is unstable then sending a keepalive to the watchdog during this interrupt is not going to change anything neither... Or am I missing something?
>
All I'm saying is that it isn't always a given that a watchdog timeout
should universally issue a hardware reset. I've worked with systems
where doing so would be a Really Bad Idea, and what we wanted instead
was the ability to know when the watchdog timer had expired so that we
could wrest control of the system away from the application.
Put another way, it isn't always the case that the _system_ has become
unstable. It's more likely that the _application_ has, and there are
other ways to fix that than by issuing a hardware reset.
In the bigger picture, getting all the benefits out of a watchdog timer
while at the same time avoiding their limitations can be a tricky
business. They're misused far more often than used properly,
unfortunately. I sense that you and I both recognize that.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
bgat at billgatliff.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-28 1:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20090821073105.GC29382@infomag.iguana.be>
2009-08-21 13:10 ` [PATCH] watchdog: Add support for the Avionic Design Xanthos watchdog timer Thierry Reding
2009-08-21 22:34 ` Andrew Morton
2009-08-22 8:18 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-08-24 9:04 ` Thierry Reding
2009-08-24 9:28 ` Thierry Reding
2009-08-27 20:23 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-08-27 20:31 ` Bill Gatliff
2009-08-27 20:44 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-08-28 1:32 ` Bill Gatliff [this message]
2009-08-31 12:35 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-08-31 20:06 ` Mark Brown
2009-08-28 6:11 ` Thierry Reding
2009-08-31 11:58 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-09-21 14:58 ` Thierry Reding
2009-09-23 7:26 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-09-23 11:49 ` Thierry Reding
2009-09-24 11:05 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2009-09-24 11:09 ` Thierry Reding
2009-08-24 9:11 ` Thierry Reding
2009-08-24 9:13 ` Wim Van Sebroeck
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=4A9733C9.9090900@billgatliff.com \
--to=bgat@billgatliff.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).