[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8de702cf-3454-44be-d522-6af3515079a3@norik.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2021 09:31:16 +0100
From: Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@...ik.com>
To: Adam Thomson <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>,
Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
"linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"linux-imx@....com" <linux-imx@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] watchdog: da9062: reset board on watchdog timeout
>
> Personally I'd stick this code in the probe(). The value won't change once it's
> set, and that seems the more logical place for it in my opinion.
>
I think that's a good idea and I don't have a reason why we shouldn't do
that.
Will send the next version of the patch series with this change.
Thanks for review.
BR,
Andrej
Powered by blists - more mailing lists