[PATCH v4 1/5] watchdog: davinci: change driver to use WDT core

[ivan.khoronzhuk]

On 12/04/2013 08:28 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 11:34:46PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>> On 11/27/2013 6:18 PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
>>> To reduce code duplicate and increase code readability use WDT core
>>> code to handle WDT interface.
>>>
>>> Remove io_lock as the WDT core uses mutex to lock each wdt device.
>>> Remove wdt_state as the WDT core tracks state with its own variable.
>>>
>>> The watchdog_init_timeout() can read timeout value from timeout-sec
>>> property if the passed value is out of bounds. The heartbeat is
>>> initialized in next way. If heartbeat is not set thought module
>>> parameter, try to read it's value from WDT node timeout-sec property.
>>> If node has no one, use default value.
>>>
>>> The heartbeat is hold in wdd->timeout by WDT core, so use it in
>>> order to set timeout period.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar at ti.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux at roeck-us.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk at ti.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/watchdog/Kconfig       |    2 +
>>>   drivers/watchdog/davinci_wdt.c |  147 ++++++++++------------------------------
>>>   2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> index 5be6e91..eb8c89d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/Kconfig
>>> @@ -271,6 +271,8 @@ config IOP_WATCHDOG
>>>   config DAVINCI_WATCHDOG
>>>   	tristate "DaVinci watchdog"
>>>   	depends on ARCH_DAVINCI
>>> +	select WATCHDOG_CORE
>>> +	select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT
>>
>> Its not clear for change log why NOWAYOUT needs to be forced on all the
>> time for all users of DaVinci watchdog.

... you are right

>>
> Actually, thinking about it, it is not necessary and can be replaced with
> 
> 	watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, 1);

Good idea, I'll replace watchdog_set_nowayout(wdd, WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT) on it.
And delete "select WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT"

> 
> In other words, there is no need to force NOWAYOUT on _other_ watchdogs which
> may be present in the system. Still, you are right, it would be nice to explain
> in the changelog (or maybe even better as comment in the code) why it is
> enforced.
> 
> Guenter
> 

Only question, should I repost only this patch or whole series?

-- 
Regards,
Ivan Khoronzhuk