[PATCH v3 6/6] watchdog: ts4600: add driver for TS-4600 watchdog

[Guenter Roeck]

On 05/14/2017 07:00 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 07:39:33AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 05/11/2017 12:22 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 03:32:59PM -0400, Sebastien Bourdelin wrote:
>>>> This watchdog is instantiated in a FPGA and can only be access using a
>>>> GPIOs bit-banged bus, called the NBUS by Technologic Systems.
>>>> The watchdog is made of only one register, called the feed register.
>>>> Writing to this register will re-arm the watchdog for a given time (and
>>>> enable it if it was disable). It can be disabled by writing a special
>>>> value into it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Bourdelin <sebastien.bourdelin at savoirfairelinux.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes v2 -> v3:
>>>>  - rebase on master
>>>>  - remove the timeout table to simplify the logic (suggested by
>>>>  Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - fix the set_timeout function (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - hardcode the max_hw_heartbeat_ms value based on the ts4600 max
>>>>  timeout value supported (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - remove the max_timeout usage and set a default timeout value
>>>> (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - use the devm_watchdog_register_device function instead of
>>>>  watchdog_register_device (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>>
>>>> Changes v1 -> v2:
>>>>  - rebase on master
>>>>  - retrieve the ts_nbus instantiated by the parent node (suggested by
>>>>  Linus Walleij)
>>>>  - rename the wdt by watchdog in the device tree and in the
>>>>  documentation (suggested by Rob Herring)
>>>>  - add a dependency to the TS_NBUS driver in the Kconfig (suggested by
>>>>  Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - simplify the set_timeout function (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>>  - use the max_hw_heartbeat_ms callback instead of the max_timeout
>>>>  callback (suggested by Guenter Roeck)
>>>> ---
>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/ts4600-wdt.txt    |  16 ++
>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx28-ts4600-common.dtsi         |   5 +
>>>
>>> The dts change shouldn't be mixed within driver patch.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe, but Rob Acked the devicetree changes, so I don't see a reason
>> for splitting it up now.
>
> What Rob Acked is devicetree bindings, and ARM dts changes should
> normally go via arm-soc tree, unless there is a good reason they
> shouldn't.
>
Ok, good point.

Guenter