[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52F005A0.4080807@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 14:09:52 -0700
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Andrew Chew <AChew@...dia.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
CC: "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
"galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
"rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>,
"thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
"abrestic@...omium.org" <abrestic@...omium.org>,
"dgreid@...omium.org" <dgreid@...omium.org>,
"katierh@...omium.org" <katierh@...omium.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ARM: tegra: add nvidia,wdt-timer-id optional property
On 02/03/2014 11:59 AM, Andrew Chew wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:46:51PM +0000, Andrew Chew wrote:
>>> This optional property can be used to specify which timers are to be
>>> used for hardware watchdog timeouts (via a tegra wdt driver).
>>
>> Is there any reason that a particular timer should be used?
>
> I worry about colliding with other timer allocations, and wanted to be
> flexible in this regard.
Are the other timer allocations represented in DT, or simply made by or
hard-coded in the driver? If the former, this property seems like a good
equivalent of any existing allocations. If the latter, can't the driver
just allocate or hard-code the allocation in the same way as any
existing allocations?
--
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