[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c82fe7a9-0a5a-fd70-ae3d-6fdc5fca5a9a@prevas.dk>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 10:51:41 +0100
From: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
To: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>,
Bruno Thomsen <bruno.thomsen@...il.com>
Cc: linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rtc: pcf2127: only use watchdog when explicitly
available
On 24/09/2020 12.52, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> now that there are two people stumbling over the pcf2127 driver
> providing a non-functional watchdog device, here comes an RFC patch to
> address this.
I just want to add a "me too" here, as I'm also now affected by the
pcf2127 exposing a watchdog device (1) it didn't use to (affecting what
/dev/watchdog0 means) and (2) is not actually hooked up in hardware.
So can we please move forward with adding the has-watchdog opt-in DT
property so existing boards will not be affected?
Thanks,
Rasmus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists