linux-kernel - Re: [RFC, PATCH, take 2] watchdog on generic gpio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200801141206.39858.florian.fainelli@telecomint.eu>
Date:	Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:06:38 +0100
From:	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...ecomint.eu>
To:	Marc Pignat <marc.pignat@...s.ch>
Cc:	wim@...ana.be, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH, take 2] watchdog on generic gpio

Hi Marc,

Le lundi 14 janvier 2008, Marc Pignat a écrit :
> +static int gpio_wdt_keepalive(struct gpio_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> +	gpio_set_value(wdt->pdata->pin, 0);
> +	gpio_set_value(wdt->pdata->pin, 1);
> +	return 0;
> +}

I would like this function to be supplied by the platform_data structure 
because as I mentioned before, not all GPIO connected watchdog will simply 
need a single bit to be toggled, but also sometimes a full GPIO line.

If we do not supply any specific callback to keepalive the watchdog let's just 
assume we need a single bit to be toggled if this is ok with you ?

Thank you !
-- 
Cordialement, Florian Fainelli
------------------------------
--
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/