linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] watchdog: rti_wdt: Allow timeout config with timeout-sec

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <17fc8f51-8e60-4ad6-a385-fa46fd7c5f86@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:01:32 -0500
From: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
CC: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: rti_wdt: Allow timeout config with timeout-sec

Hi Guenter,

On 8/21/24 6:28 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 03:19:35PM -0500, Judith Mendez wrote:
>> Currently rti_wdt does not allow timeout to be configured
>> via DT property timeout-sec, so fix watchdog_init_timeout
>> to be able to use timeout-sec.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/watchdog/rti_wdt.c | 3 ++-
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/rti_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/rti_wdt.c
>> index 8e1be7ba01039..7260c67e60a25 100644
>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/rti_wdt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/rti_wdt.c
>> @@ -332,7 +332,8 @@ static int rti_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>   		memunmap(vaddr);
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, heartbeat, dev);
>> +	wdd->timeout = heartbeat;
> 
> The proper fix would be to initialize the 'heartbeat' variable with 0,
> set wdt->timeout to DEFAULT_HEARTBEAT, and to keep passing 'heartbeat'
> to watchdog_init_timeout(). That used to be done but was explicitly
> changed in an earlier commit, presumably on purpose. I am not inclined
> to accept a (partial) revert unless the author of commit 5527483f confirms
> that this is acceptable and desirable. Otherwise we'll just end up in an
> edit war, which I really don't want to get into.

You are right, I completely missed this change in this commit due
to the subject line not being related. I will try to align with Tero
Kristo to see if this is something we can add back. Thanks.

~ Judith

> 
> Guenter
> `
> 
>> +	watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, 0, dev);
>>   
>>   	ret = watchdog_register_device(wdd);
>>   	if (ret) {
>>
>> base-commit: 860bbe8e618fd62446309e286ab4a83d38201c0a
>> -- 
>> 2.46.0
>>