[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4880375.uMKpQASVMt@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 17:35 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>, wim@...ana.be,
dbaryshkov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog driver
On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Moved to where?
> >
> > I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
> > intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
> >
>
> I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function pointer from a watchdog
> driver doesn't seem like a good idea either. The arm code _does_ provide
> and expect platform code to set the reset function, so having it in the arm
> code would at least make more sense than expecting some unrelated driver
> code to set it - especially since it is inherently racy [1].
I don't think the race is inherent. We could solve the multiple registration
problem and the unload problem using a notifier chain. If there are actually
cases where we expect to see multiple reboot functions to be present in the
system, we could go one step further and have a priority associated with
it, so we try the best function first and fall back to soft_restart()
if everything else fails.
Arnd
--
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