From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933355AbcECPHy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 11:07:54 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:42543 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755482AbcECPHv (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 11:07:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range To: Pratyush Anand , Guenter Roeck Cc: fu.wei@linaro.org, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com, wim@iguana.be, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, open list References: <20da73bb9bdf27993514c1da80fead13dc92932d.1462262900.git.panand@redhat.com> <5728A7C3.4010001@roeck-us.net> <20160503143856.GE13045@dhcppc6.redhat.com> From: Timur Tabi Message-ID: <5728BEC4.6050603@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 10:07:48 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:43.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/43.0 SeaMonkey/2.40 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160503143856.GE13045@dhcppc6.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pratyush Anand wrote: > In fact after supporting max_hw_heartbeat_ms, there should be no change for > action=0 functionally. However, we would still need some changes for action=1. IMHO, action=1 is more of a debugging option, and not something that would be used normally. I would need to see some evidence that real users want to have action=1 and a longer timeout. I've never been a fan of the action=1 option, and I'm certainly not keen any patches that make action=1 more complicated than it already is. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation collaborative project.