From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.187]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBD7DDF76 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 06:53:12 +1000 (EST) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id e27so1409098nfd.9 for ; Mon, 12 May 2008 13:53:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 00:53:03 +0400 From: Anton Vorontsov To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [WATCHDOG] mpc83xx_wdt: add support for MPC86xx CPUs Message-ID: <20080512205303.GA14198@zarina> References: <20080512185206.GA25818@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru> <64629276-8337-4FFE-B3E1-306678BF179D@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 In-Reply-To: <64629276-8337-4FFE-B3E1-306678BF179D@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Wim Van Sebroeck , Timur Tabi Reply-To: cbouatmailru@gmail.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 02:24:20PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On May 12, 2008, at 1:52 PM, Anton Vorontsov wrote: > >> On MPC86xx the watchdog could be enabled only at power-on-reset, and >> could not be disabled afterwards. We must ping the watchdog from the >> kernel until the userspace handles it. >> >> MPC83xx CPUs are only differ in a way that watchdog could be disabled >> once, but after it was enabled via software it becomes just the same >> as MPC86xx. >> >> Thus, to support MPC86xx I added the kernel timer which pings the >> watchdog until the userspace opens it. >> >> Since we implemented the timer, now we're able to implement proper >> handling for the CONFIG_WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT case, for MPC83xx and >> MPC86xx. >> >> Also move the probe code into subsys_initcall, because we want start >> pinging the watchdog ASAP, and misc devices are available in >> subsys_initcall. >> >> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov >> --- >> drivers/watchdog/Kconfig | 4 +- >> drivers/watchdog/mpc83xx_wdt.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> +++++---- > > we should rename it to mpc8xxx_wdt.c I don't see much sense in renaming the files just because the driver now supports another line of processors... Do you really want the rename? Please repeat if so. -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2