[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110624191756.GX23305@infomag.iguana.be>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:17:56 +0200
From: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Mark Lord <kernel@...savvy.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Watchdog Mailing List <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/10 v2] Generic Watchdog Timer Driver
Hi All,
> > > This is another tricky thing were developers will always discuss about.
> > > What you don't want to happen is that the watchdog reboots your system when it does
> > > an fsck at bootup (for instance because the system rebooted by the watchdog and left
> > > the filesystem in a dirty state...).
> > >
> > > So it's more complex if you look at the overal system...
> >
> > Sure, but that's got little to do with wanting a kernel parameter to OPTIONALLY
> > enable a hardware watchdog timer at boot.
> >
> > Filesystem checks are a separate issue, easily worked around in practice.
>
> I agree, it's nice to give system integrators the option to enable the watchdog
> very early, the problems that Wim mentioned need to be solved in user space
> but are not a serious limitation.
I'm definitely not against it and I am sure that we all agree that this is a valid
option for some drivers (certainly in embedded environments). But for me it has to
stay an option.
FYI: We allready have one driver that does this: w83697hf_wdt.c See commit
6fd656012bb8d5c5a4570adc2e630668b0109cb0.
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