Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] watchdog: st_wdt: Add new driver for ST's LPC Watchdog

[Guenter Roeck <linux-0h96xk9xTtrk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>]

On 01/22/2015 09:21 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
>> On 01/22/2015 03:56 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: David Paris <david.paris-qxv4g6HH51o@public.gmane.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/watchdog/Kconfig      |  13 ++
>>>   drivers/watchdog/Makefile     |   1 +
>>>   drivers/watchdog/st_lpc_wdt.c | 335 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   3 files changed, 349 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/watchdog/st_lpc_wdt.c
>
> [...]
>
>>> +struct st_wdog_syscfg {
>>> +	struct regmap *regmap;
>>
>> Hi David & Lee,
>>
>> Why did you add the regmap pointer to this structure and not to st_wdog ?
>> It is not a configuration value, after all, and it is always dereferenced
>> through wt_wdog->syscfg. So all it does is to make the code more complicated.
>>
>> Am I missing something ?
>
> I guess it was just to group it all together, as it will all be used
> at the same time:
>
> 	regmap_update_bits(st_wdog->syscfg->regmap,
> 			   st_wdog->syscfg->reset_type_reg,
> 			   st_wdog->syscfg->reset_type_mask,
> 			   st_wdog->warm_reset);
>
> It really doesn't matter to me either way.
>
Having it in syscfg means it is stored in the static configuration data instead
of the allocated data, which is at least conceptually wrong. So I think it should
be in st_wdog.

Thanks,
Guenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html