[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <60d07860dedf45f9bd3e41fd90a9b636@nokia-sbell.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 03:20:29 +0000
From: "Wang, Peng 1. (NSB - CN/Hangzhou)" <peng.1.wang@...ia-sbell.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
CC: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@...il.com>,
"wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
"linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] watchdog: make DesignWare watchdog allow users to set
bigger timeout value
> No, that won't be necessary.
ok, thank you very much again :)
Peng Wang
-----Original Message-----
From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:groeck7@...il.com] On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 10:41 AM
To: Wang, Peng 1. (NSB - CN/Hangzhou) <peng.1.wang@...ia-sbell.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@...il.com>; wim@...ux-watchdog.org; linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: make DesignWare watchdog allow users to set bigger timeout value
On 11/21/19 5:16 PM, Wang, Peng 1. (NSB - CN/Hangzhou) wrote:
>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>
> Roeck, thanks for your time to guide me to finish the review. Do I need to re-send a mail with your sign?
>
No, that won't be necessary.
Guenter
> Peng Wang
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:groeck7@...il.com] On Behalf Of Guenter
> Roeck
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 10:15 PM
> To: Wang, Peng 1. (NSB - CN/Hangzhou) <peng.1.wang@...ia-sbell.com>
> Cc: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@...il.com>; wim@...ux-watchdog.org;
> linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: make DesignWare watchdog allow users
> to set bigger timeout value
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:35:12AM +0000, Wang, Peng 1. (NSB - CN/Hangzhou) wrote:
>> From aabaa4b709bd451e566c906e8d1dca48f92f9b12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
>> 2001
>> From: Peng Wang <peng.1.wang@...ia-sbell.com>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 15:12:59 +0800
>> Subject: [PATCH] watchdog: make DesignWare watchdog allow users to
>> set bigger timeout value
>>
>> watchdog_dev.c provides means to allow users to set bigger timeout
>> value than HW can support, make DesignWare watchdog align with this.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> v2 -> v1:
>> - use top_s to compare with wdd->max_hw_heartbeat_ms
>> - update wdd->timeout in case it's greater than HW supports
>> - fix comments error
>>
>> v1: initial version
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peng Wang <peng.1.wang@...ia-sbell.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>
>> ---
>> drivers/watchdog/dw_wdt.c | 10 +++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/dw_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/dw_wdt.c
>> index fef7c61..12c116e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/dw_wdt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/dw_wdt.c
>> @@ -114,7 +114,15 @@ static int dw_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd, unsigned int top_s)
>> writel(top_val | top_val << WDOG_TIMEOUT_RANGE_TOPINIT_SHIFT,
>> dw_wdt->regs + WDOG_TIMEOUT_RANGE_REG_OFFSET);
>>
>> - wdd->timeout = dw_wdt_top_in_seconds(dw_wdt, top_val);
>> + /*
>> + * In case users set bigger timeout value than HW can support,
>> + * kernel(watchdog_dev.c) helps to feed watchdog before
>> + * wdd->max_hw_heartbeat_ms
>> + */
>> + if ( top_s * 1000 <= wdd->max_hw_heartbeat_ms )
>> + wdd->timeout = dw_wdt_top_in_seconds(dw_wdt, top_val);
>> + else
>> + wdd->timeout = top_s;
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists