linux-watchdog.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: wim@iguana.be, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] watchdog: Add watchdog timer support for the WinSystems EBC-C384
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:36:56 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56A6B198.2080205@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A6889E.60208@roeck-us.net>

On 01/25/2016 03:42 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 01/25/2016 11:28 AM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
>> If ask for 299 seconds surely I should get 300 not 240 ?
>> (Whether to round off or round up is an interesting question for the
>> middle range - does it go off early or late - I'd have said late but...)
>>
> 
> Matter of endless discussion. Some argue that the value should be rounded
> up, some argue that it should be rounded down, some argue that it should
> be rounded to the closest match. Each camp has its own valid arguments.
> I usually leave it up to the driver's author to decide, with a slight
> preference to never select a value larger than requested.

I implemented it to round down simply because it was the simplest        
solution (i.e. integer truncation). Although I see merit in an           
implementation that rounds to the closest valid value, I'll keep the     
current implementation for now due to its simplicity; if enough users of 
the driver prefer a different implementation, then I'll add it in a      
later patch.

>> Is there no ACPI entry for it ?
>>
> Same here. As long as the board is identified, I tend to leave it up
> to the driver author to decide _how_ to identify it.
> 
> Only question for me would be if the watchdog timer is implemented
> in a Super-IO chip, and if so, if it would be possible to use the chip
> identification instead of a DMI (or ACPI) entry to instantiate the driver.

I do not believe there is an ACPI entry for it. Interestingly, the       
watchdog timer BIOS configuration option for this motherboard is listed  
under the Super I/O menu; perhaps this watchdog timer is implemented in  
the Super I/O chip.                                                      
                                                                         
The manual for this motherboard does not provide much information about  
the Super I/O chip (no model number, etc.), and neither sensors-detect    
nor superiotool was able to detect it. I've sent an email to the         
motherboard company (WinSystems) requesting further information about    
the Super I/O chip and whether the watchdog timer is built-in to the     
Super I/O chip.                                                          
                                                                         
William Breathitt Gray

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-25 23:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-25 19:09 [PATCH v3] watchdog: Add watchdog timer support for the WinSystems EBC-C384 William Breathitt Gray
2016-01-25 19:28 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-01-25 20:42   ` Guenter Roeck
2016-01-25 23:36     ` William Breathitt Gray [this message]
2016-01-26  1:26       ` Guenter Roeck
2016-01-26 23:38         ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-01-27  5:02           ` Guenter Roeck
2016-01-28  0:18             ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-01-28  1:51               ` Guenter Roeck
2016-01-28 11:05               ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-01-26  1:58       ` Guenter Roeck
2016-02-28 14:07   ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2016-02-28 14:36     ` William Breathitt Gray
2016-02-28 15:02     ` Guenter Roeck
2016-02-28 16:24       ` Wim Van Sebroeck
2016-01-26  1:11 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-01-26  9:09 ` Paul Bolle
2016-01-26 12:33   ` William Breathitt Gray
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-01-26 14:31 William Breathitt Gray
2016-01-26 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck

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=56A6B198.2080205@gmail.com \
    --to=vilhelm.gray@gmail.com \
    --cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=wim@iguana.be \
    /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).