From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from host.buserror.net (host.buserror.net [209.198.135.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rzWQW43L3zDqSM for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 07:26:27 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: <1469568378.25630.119.camel@buserror.net> From: Scott Wood To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Kumar Gala , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , Alessio Igor Bogani , Daniel Axtens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 16:26:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1469507114-5788-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <1469507114-5788-3-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <1469519945.25630.105.camel@buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc: Convert fsl_rstcr_restart to a reset handler List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 14:22 -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 21:25 -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > > > > > > Convert fsl_rstcr_restart into a function to be registered with > > > register_reset_handler() API and introduce fls_rstcr_restart_register() > > > function that can be added as an initcall that would do aforementioned > > > registration. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov > > Is there a particular motivation for this (e.g. new handlers you plan to > > register elsewhere)? > I have a MPC8548 based board that which uses, at least for time being, > SBC8548's init code(by claiming compatibility in DT) which has an > external watchdog that implements reset functionality. The driver for > watchdog is just a generic watchdog driver and having an ability to > register custom reset handlers is very handy. > > I don't really have any motivation for fixing boards other than > SBC8548 and even that I can avoid doing by making a new custom board > file in my tree that would not populate .reset field. I can drop this > patch from the series if the code of those boards is in "don't touch > it unless absolutely have to" state. I'm not saying not to touch it -- I just wanted to understand the context. -Scott