From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>, Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>
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 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 16:36:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <572BD8E3.4070707@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <572B8F52.2000709@codeaurora.org>
On 05/05/2016 11:22 AM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Pratyush Anand wrote:
>> I think, in the long run we must have SBSA
>> watchdog specification improvement to keep WOR as 64 bit.
>
> I agree with this 100%. IMHO, using a 32-bit WOR was just a bad decision.
>
A 32-bit counter is absolutely fine. Letting it run with a 400MHz clock
(or was it 200 MHz ?) is the problem. A resolution of 2.5ns for a watchdog
timer does not really make any sense.
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-05 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-03 8:20 [PATCH RFC] Watchdog: sbsa_gwdt: Enhance timeout range Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 12:12 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 13:24 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 13:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 14:17 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 14:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 15:04 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 13:29 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-03 14:38 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 15:07 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-03 15:51 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-03 17:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-04 14:14 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 14:21 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-04 15:59 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-04 16:17 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 16:43 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 18:20 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-05-05 18:22 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:36 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2016-05-05 23:38 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-05 23:45 ` Timur Tabi
2016-05-06 0:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-05-05 23:51 ` 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=572BD8E3.4070707@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=fu.wei@linaro.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
--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