From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP3:WDT:Enable IVA, SECURE and minor bugfixes Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:16:38 -0700 Message-ID: <87ws7lw9vd.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1244495293-17244-1-git-send-email-ubh@ti.com> <87r5xtzcsg.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <00695C9C8F8B4448856F48142B4AA201BD76FE8C@dnce02.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f171.google.com ([209.85.222.171]:49214 "EHLO mail-pz0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756349AbZFISQj (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jun 2009 14:16:39 -0400 Received: by pzk1 with SMTP id 1so187239pzk.33 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:16:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <00695C9C8F8B4448856F48142B4AA201BD76FE8C@dnce02.ent.ti.com> (Ulrik Bech Hald's message of "Tue\, 9 Jun 2009 20\:02\:40 +0200") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Hald, Ulrik Bech" Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" "Hald, Ulrik Bech" writes: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@deeprootsystems.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 9:45 AM >> To: Hald, Ulrik Bech >> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP3:WDT:Enable IVA, SECURE and minor bugfixes >> >> Ulrik Bech Hald writes: >> >> > This patch series enables support for IVA and SECURE >> > WDTs, available on omap34xx. >> > For omap34xx devices the WDT will be accessible >> > (when present) through: >> > SECURE: /dev/watchdog1 >> > MPU: /dev/watchdog2 >> > IVA: /dev/watchdog3 >> > >> > For devices older than omap34xx only MPU WDT is present >> > and will be accessible through /dev/watchdog >> >> I think you should make the MPU WDT the first one since it will always >> be present. > > The reason, why I numbered them as above, is to make them match the OMAP34xx TRM WDT numbering scheme, where SECURE WDT=WDT1, MPU WDT=WDT2 and IVA WDT=WDT3. My thought was that it would introduce more confusion to change the numbers in /dev/ to something else, although I did consider your point. > Do you still think I should change the numbers? Yes. Personally, I don't think the TRM should influence userspace visible nodes in this case. I would rather see the watchdog that exists on all platforms be the first one. Kevin