[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160414143125.GB1539@katana>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:31:25 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] ARM: PSCI: Register with kernel restart handler
> "the higher, the more important" makes sense to me. We don't have to
> enforce the linux scheme, though that happens to be the same (the priority
> argument in the notifier block takes an int, so it would not even be
> necessary to adjust it unless someone specifies 0xffffffff).
I think we should enforce the scheme internally (but not in DT, of
course):
a) it is documented to be in the range 0-255
b) it should be valid to prioritize the watchdogs with 1,2,3 in DT.
If we don't apply the '255 - pos_in_sorted_list' value, then the
priority could be below some machine default of 128, or?
> I am fine either way - boolean properties or numbers, with a personal
> preference for numbers as more flexible.
Same here. Time to go to the DT list probably.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists