From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:55057 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754057Ab1FXOzw (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:55:52 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Mark Lord Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/10 v2] Generic Watchdog Timer Driver Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:55:03 +0200 Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck , Alan Cox , LKML , Linux Watchdog Mailing List References: <20110618172537.GH3441@infomag.iguana.be> <20110622201346.GE26745@infomag.iguana.be> <4E034A09.6050107@teksavvy.com> In-Reply-To: <4E034A09.6050107@teksavvy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201106241655.03637.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 23 June 2011 16:13:29 Mark Lord wrote: > On 11-06-22 04:13 PM, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote: > > > > This is another tricky thing were developers will always discuss about. > > What you don't want to happen is that the watchdog reboots your system when it does > > an fsck at bootup (for instance because the system rebooted by the watchdog and left > > the filesystem in a dirty state...). > > > > So it's more complex if you look at the overal system... > > Sure, but that's got little to do with wanting a kernel parameter to OPTIONALLY > enable a hardware watchdog timer at boot. > > Filesystem checks are a separate issue, easily worked around in practice. I agree, it's nice to give system integrators the option to enable the watchdog very early, the problems that Wim mentioned need to be solved in user space but are not a serious limitation. Arnd