[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200928084343.cl42lxsiionvq7tg@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 10:43:43 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Bruno Thomsen <bruno.thomsen@...il.com>, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] rtc: pcf2127: only use watchdog when
explicitly available
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 08:54:47AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 9/27/20 1:09 AM, Bruno Thomsen wrote:
> > Den tor. 24. sep. 2020 kl. 12.53 skrev Uwe Kleine-König
> > <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>:
> >>
> >> Most boards using the pcf2127 chip (in my bubble) don't make use of the
> >> watchdog functionality and the respective output is not connected. The
> >> effect on such a board is that there is a watchdog device provided that
> >> doesn't work.
> >>
> >> So only register the watchdog if the device tree has a "has-watchdog"
> >> property.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c | 3 ++-
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> >> index 5b1f1949b5e5..8bd89d641578 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-pcf2127.c
> >> @@ -340,7 +340,8 @@ static int pcf2127_watchdog_init(struct device *dev, struct pcf2127 *pcf2127)
> >> u32 wdd_timeout;
> >> int ret;
> >>
> >> - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_WATCHDOG))
> >> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_WATCHDOG) ||
> >> + !device_property_read_bool(dev, "has-watchdog"))
> >> return 0;
> >
> > I don't think the compiler can remove the function if
> > CONFIG_WATCHDOG is disabled due to the device tree
> > value check. Maybe it can if split into 2 conditions.
> >
>
> If the first part of the expression is always false, the second
> part should not even be evaluated.
This is wrong. For || the second expression isn't evaluated if the first
evaluates to true (and the whole expression becomes true). This is the
intended behaviour: If CONFIG_WATCHDOG is off, we don't need to check
for the dt property and just skip the watchdog part.
> Either case, the code now hard depends on the compiler optimizing the
> code away.
>
> It calls devm_watchdog_register_device() which doesn't exist
> if CONFIG_WATCHDOG is not enabled. I didn't know that this is safe,
> and I would personally not want to rely on it, but we live and
> learn.
AFAICT this is save and used in other places in the kernel, too. This
is one of the reasons why you cannot compile the kernel with -O0.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists