Hi,
On Wednesday, September 18, 2013 12:20:31 PM Leela Krishna Amudala wrote:
> Tomasz,
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Tomasz,
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.txt
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.txt
> >>> @@ -7,8 +7,20 @@ occurred.
> >>> Required properties:
> >>> - compatible : should be "samsung,s3c2410-wdt"
> >>
> >> Since the WDT block of Exynos 5420 needs some extra configuration in PMU
> >> registers, it is no longer compatible with samsung.s3c2410-wdt. Please
> >> introduce separate compatible ("samsung,exynos5420-wdt") and make the
> >> driver handle the additional configuration only if running on a device with
> >> this compatible value.
> >>
> >> I'd suggest introducing quirk system to the driver and adding a
> >> NEEDS_PMU_CONFIG quirk selected by DT match entry with "samsung,exynos5420-
> >> wdt" compatible.
> >>
> >>> - reg : base physical address of the controller and length of memory
> >>> mapped - region.
> >>> + region and the optional (addresses and length of memory mapped regions
> >>> + of) PMU registers for masking/unmasking WDT.
> >>> - interrupts : interrupt number to the cpu.
> >>>
> >>> Optional properties:
> >>> - timeout-sec : contains the watchdog timeout in seconds.
> >>> +- reset-mask-bit: bit number in the PMU registers to program mask/unmask
> >>> WDT. +
> >>
> >> I believe this is mandatory on Exynos 5420 and unused on previous SoCs. It
> >> should be handled depending on compatible value.
> >
> > I think at least 5250 needs something similar. I believe we got away
> > with it in the past since other (non-WDT) code was tweaking with this
> > bit, but that was a little bit gross. Leela Krishna can correct me if
> > I'm wrong.
> >
>
> Yes, 5250 also needs this reset-mask-bit, but not required by SoCs
> other than Exynos5xxx.
> Hence I kept it as optional parameter.
>
> I took care of this code such that it won't break on older SoCs.
>
> If you notice the code in probe function, I used the check condition
>
> if (!IS_ERR(wdt->pmu_disable_reg) && !IS_ERR(wdt->pmu_mask_reset_reg)) {
> }
>
> i.e., if any of the PMU register address is not mentioned in the DT
> node it simply skips reading reset-mask-bit
> and continues execution (which may happen in older SoC DT node).
>
> ..also, in s3c2410wdt_mask_and_disable_reset() function, below
> condition check is happening
>
> if (IS_ERR(wdt->pmu_disable_reg) || IS_ERR(wdt->pmu_mask_reset_reg)
> || (wdt->pmu_mask_bit < 0))
> return;
>
> i.e., if any of the registers is not specified in DT node simply
> return without programming
> PMU registers(which is true in case of older SoCs).
>
> If you think this doesn't sounds good way of handling older SoCs.
> I'll add new compatible string for Exynos5xxx and do like what you said. :)
Yes, please re-do the code per Tomasz's suggestions.
This would also allow you to check return values of devm_ioremap_resource()
calls in the probe method and require them to succeed in order to register
watchdog device (which is unfortunately not what happens currently).
Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
