[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:38:14 +0100
From: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
To: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Watchdog Mailing List <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 5/10] Generic Watchdog Timer Driver
Hi Alexander,
> On Wednesday 23 February 2011, 21:43:30 Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> > commit 1959ea403c69af855f5cd13e5c9b33123d2137b2
> > Author: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
> > Date: Fri Jun 18 09:45:49 2010 +0000
> >
> > watchdog: WatchDog Timer Driver Core - Part 5
> >
> > This part add's the WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT and WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT ioctl
> > functionality to the WatchDog Timer Driver Core framework.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
> >
> > [snip]
>
> Any specific reason you can only specify seconds as timeout? There is no way
> to set a timeout of e.g. 500ms or 1500ms.
> You can change this by using using a struct timeval for setting a timeout.
> What do you think?
1) The current ioctl call is like this in all drivers. So changing it would break things.
2) Is there a real need for having 500ms or 1500ms? why would 1 or 2 seconds not be OK? (which are allready small timeouts for userspace anyway...)
Kind regards,
Wim.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists