linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] clocksource: Add Tegra186 timers 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: <b3859b98-02a3-d197-735c-2c9a9fbe597c@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:45:57 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] clocksource: Add Tegra186 timers support

23.03.2020 16:42, Thierry Reding пишет:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 06:38:32PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 20.03.2020 18:11, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
>>> 20.03.2020 16:34, Thierry Reding пишет:
>>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>>>>
>>>> Currently this only supports a single watchdog, which uses a timer in
>>>> the background for countdown. Eventually the timers could be used for
>>>> various time-keeping tasks, but by default the architected timer will
>>>> already provide that functionality.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> ...
>>>> +config TEGRA186_TIMER
>>>> +	bool "NVIDIA Tegra186 timer driver"
>>>
>>> tristate?
>>>
>>>> +	depends on ARCH_TEGRA || COMPILE_TEST
>>>
>>> depends on WATCHDOG && WATCHDOG_CORE?
>>
>> Actually `select WATCHDOG_CORE` for the WATCHDOG_CORE.
> 
> WATCHDOG_CORE is user-visible, so it's not safe to select it. Any reason
> depends on WATCHDOG && WATCHDOG_CORE wouldn't work? I guess a dependency
> on WATCHDOG_CORE would be enough because that itself already depends on
> WATCHDOG.

It looks to that should be much better if you could factor out all the
watchdog functionality into the drivers/watchdog, like it's done in a
case of MC / SMMU drivers for example.