From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755900AbXJXCaI (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:30:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753400AbXJXC34 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:29:56 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:57417 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753203AbXJXC3z (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:29:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:29:48 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Gilles Gigan Cc: wim@iguana.be, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: add Nano 7240 driver Message-Id: <20071023192948.1fe5dd8d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20071024121159.03d209ec.gilles.gigan@gmail.com> References: <20071024121159.03d209ec.gilles.gigan@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:11:59 +1000 Gilles Gigan wrote: > + case WDIOC_SETOPTIONS:{ > + int retval = -EINVAL; > + > + if (arg & WDIOS_DISABLECARD) { > + wdt_disable(); > + retval = 0; > + } > + > + if (arg & WDIOS_ENABLECARD) { > + wdt_enable(); > + retval = 0; > + } > + > + return retval; hrm. So if userspace does ioctl(..., WDIOS_DISABLECARD|WDIOS_ENABLECARD, that happens to be equivalent to WDIOS_ENABLECARD? Do all watchdog drivers do it exactly the same way, or are we offering inconsistent interfaces between different drivers? An exceedingly minor point, but fun nonetheless. (And hey, I had to say _something_) (apart from directing your attention to scripts/checkpatch.pl)