[PATCH v7 1/1] drivers: watchdog: revise watchdog bootstatus

[Chia Hsing Yin]

I can include reset condition in struct maybe like this

static const struct aspeed_wdt_config ast2600_config = {
.ext_pulse_width_mask = 0xfffff,
.irq_shift = 0,
.irq_mask = GENMASK(31, 10),
.compatible = "aspeed,ast2600-scu",
.reset_event = AST2600_SYSTEM_RESET_EVENT,
.watchdog_reset_flag = AST2600_WATCHDOG_RESET_FLAG,
.extern_reset_flag = EXTERN_RESET_FLAG,
.reset_flag_clear = AST2600_RESET_FLAG_CLEAR,
};

in probe( ) we  just call

scu_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible(wdt->cfg->compatible);
if (IS_ERR(scu_base))
    return PTR_ERR(scu_base);

ret = regmap_read(scu_base, wdt->cfg->reset_event, &status);
if (ret)
    return ret;

if ((status & POWERON_RESET_FLAG) == 0 &&
     status & wdt->cfg->watchdog_reset_flag)
    wdt->wdd.bootstatus = (status & wdt->cfg->extern_reset_flag) ?
    WDIOF_EXTERN1 : WDIOF_CARDRESET;

status = wdt->cfg->watchdog_reset_flag | POWERON_RESET_FLAG |
wdt->cfg->extern_reset_flag;

ret = regmap_write(scu_base, wdt->cfg->reset_event, status);

Does this meet your expectations?

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 8:42 AM Andrew Jeffery
<andrew at codeconstruct.com.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-04-25 at 17:07 +0800, Peter Yin wrote:
> > Regarding the AST2600 specification, the WDTn Timeout Status Register
> > (WDT10) has bit 1 reserved. Bit 1 of the status register indicates
> > on ast2500 if the boot was from the second boot source.
> > It does not indicate that the most recent reset was triggered by
> > the watchdog. The code should just be changed to set WDIOF_CARDRESET
> > if bit 0 of the status register is set. However, this bit can be clear when
> > watchdog register 0x0c bit1(Reset System after timeout) is enabled.
> > Thereforce include SCU register to veriy WDIOF_EXTERN1 and WDIOF_CARDRESET
> > in ast2600 SCU74 or ast2400/ast2500 SCU3C.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Yin <peteryin.openbmc at gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/watchdog/aspeed_wdt.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> After this patch the probe() implementation is ~250loc with a whole
> bunch of conditional behaviours based on the SoC version. Maybe it's
> time to break it up into version-specific functions that are called
> from the probe() implementation?
>
> Andrew