From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/10] watchdog: bcm63xx_wdt: Use WATCHDOG_CORE Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 06:10:17 -0800 Message-ID: <5655C149.5010008@roeck-us.net> References: <5650BFD6.5030700@simon.arlott.org.uk> <5650C08C.6090300@simon.arlott.org.uk> <5650E2FA.6090408@roeck-us.net> <5650E5BB.6020404@simon.arlott.org.uk> <56512937.6030903@roeck-us.net> <5651CB13.4090704@simon.arlott.org.uk> <5651CBF0.30904@simon.arlott.org.uk> <56552099.7070709@roeck-us.net> <726719450643bb69683224d731b582b0df27fe1f@8b5064a13e22126c1b9329f0dc35b8915774b7c3.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <726719450643bb69683224d731b582b0df27fe1f-dyyJQ+qCPjsfFgGGEbPnq5KvX+y0N6jJ2mWzQvkZbzCn6nfhxgf73RdaaeUjXGGo@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-watchdog-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Simon Arlott Cc: "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Ralf Baechle , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Marc Zyngier , Kevin Cernekee , Florian Fainelli , Wim Van Sebroeck , Maxime Bizon , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mips-6z/3iImG2C8G8FEW9MqTrA@public.gmane.org, linux-watchdog-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Jonas Gorski List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 11/25/2015 05:02 AM, Simon Arlott wrote: > On Wed, November 25, 2015 02:44, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> The "running" flag should no longer be needed. watchdog_active() >> should provide that information. > > I'm going to need to keep that because I need to know if it's running > in the interrupt handler, and wdd->lock is a mutex. > >>> @@ -306,17 +202,18 @@ unregister_timer: >>> >>> static int bcm63xx_wdt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> { >>> - if (!nowayout) >>> - bcm63xx_wdt_hw_stop(); >>> + struct watchdog_device *wdd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >>> >>> - misc_deregister(&bcm63xx_wdt_miscdev); >>> bcm63xx_timer_unregister(TIMER_WDT_ID); >>> + watchdog_unregister_device(wdd); >> >> Shouldn't that come first, before unregistering the timer ? > > No, because wdd->dev is used in the interrupt handler. I will have to > move registration of the interrupt to after creating the watchdog > because it could currently be used before wdd->dev is set. > Does unregistering the timer disable the interrupt ? Thanks, Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html