linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: add Palmas Watchdog support

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: <512E88B5.6050008@slimlogic.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:29:09 +0000
From:	Ian Lartey <ian@...mlogic.co.uk>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
	ldewangan@...dia.com, j-keerthy@...com, gg@...mlogic.co.uk,
	wim@...ana.be, grant.likely@...retlab.ca, rob.herring@...xeda.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: add Palmas Watchdog support

On 27/02/13 20:36, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/27/2013 01:17 PM, Ian Lartey wrote:
>> On 27/02/13 18:38, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 02/27/2013 11:36 AM, Ian Lartey wrote:
>>>> From: Graeme Gregory <gg@...mlogic.co.uk>
>>>>
>>>> Add support for the Palmas watchdog timer which has a timeout
>>>> configurable
>>>> from 1s to 128s.
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/palmas_wdt.c
>>>> b/drivers/watchdog/palmas_wdt.c
>>>
>>>> +static struct of_device_id of_palmas_match_tbl[] = {
>>>> +    { .compatible = "ti,palmas-wdt", },
>>>> +    { /* end */ }
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> Is there a DT binding document for that compatible value?
>>
>> The device tree for this compatible value is actually empty,
>> shall I remove it or is it OK to show it as empty in the
>> bindings document ?
>> There will be other palmas device bindings in this document.
>
> Well, you need a binding document that describes how to create this
> node. If it needs no properties other than compatible, it'll be a simple
> document!
>
> Did you review my comments on the other patches re: whether the
> sub-modules of this HW actually should be sub-nodes in DT or not? If
> not, then you don't need this node in DT, and hence there will be no
> compatible value for the node, and hence no need to write a binding
> document.

I've not reviewed your comments on the other patches, so I'll look at
those before responding properly.

> --
> 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/
>

--
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/