On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:56, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/27/21 2:52 PM, Sam Protsenko wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 01:30, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 00:33, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 11/23/21 8:17 AM, Sam Protsenko wrote: > >>>> On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 at 18:06, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 06:56:44PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote: > >>>>>> Now that PMU enablement code was extended for new Exynos SoCs, it > >>>>>> doesn't look very cohesive and consistent anymore. Do a bit of renaming, > >>>>>> grouping and style changes, to make it look good again. While at it, add > >>>>>> quirks documentation as well. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No functional change, just a refactoring commit. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> Changes in v4: > >>>>>> - Added R-b tag by Guenter Roeck > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Changes in v3: > >>>>>> - Added quirks documentation > >>>>>> - Added R-b tag by Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Changes in v2: > >>>>>> - (none): it's a new patch > >>>>>> > >>>>>> drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c > >>>>>> index ec341c876225..f211be8bf976 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c > >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c > >>>>>> @@ -56,17 +56,51 @@ > >>>>>> #define EXYNOS5_RST_STAT_REG_OFFSET 0x0404 > >>>>>> #define EXYNOS5_WDT_DISABLE_REG_OFFSET 0x0408 > >>>>>> #define EXYNOS5_WDT_MASK_RESET_REG_OFFSET 0x040c > >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_PMU_CONFIG (1 << 0) > >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_RST_STAT (1 << 1) > >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_WTCLRINT_REG (1 << 2) > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +/** > >>>>> > >>>>> 0-day complains: > >>>>> > >>>>> drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c:94: warning: expecting prototype for Quirk flags for different Samsung watchdog IP(). Prototype was for QUIRK_HAS_WTCLRINT_REG() instead > >>>>> > >>>>> It doesn't seem to like the idea of documented bit masks. Not really sure > >>>>> what to do here. I am inclined to ignore it, but I don't want to get flooded > >>>>> by 0-day complaints until I retire either. Any idea ? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Seems like 0-day thinks this kernel-doc comment is for the first > >>>> define only, and thus the comment has wrong format, or something like > >>>> that. I tried to follow the same style as GFP_KERNEL and others are > >>>> documented. > >>>> > >>>> Anyway, if you don't like 0-day complaints, can you please just > >>>> replace kernel-doc comment (/**) with regular comment (/*), by > >>>> removing one asterisk in the patch? Or I can re-send the patch > >>>> correspondingly -- then just let me know. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Oh, never mind. Let's just hope that 0-day stops complaining at some point. > >>> > >> > >> Just sent v5 for this patch, fixing that 0-day warning properly. Found > >> info about it here: [1]. So to check that warning, apparently it's > >> enough to run "make W=n" build, or dry-run for kernel-doc script like > >> this: > >> > >> $ scripts/kernel-doc -v -none drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c > >> > >> Anyway, please take v4 series + v5 for this patch. Hope that'll be all > >> for 0-day swearing :) > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst > >> > > > > Hi Guenter, > > > > Can you please take this patch: > > > > [PATCH v4 12/12] watchdog: s3c2410: Add Exynos850 support > > > > and replace "Cleanup PMU related code" patch you already applied with this one: > > > > [PATCH v5] watchdog: s3c2410: Cleanup PMU related code > > > > I can see you already took most of WDT patches I sent, but those two > > seem to be missing. > > > > Upstream work is always "time permitting". Done now. > Thank you, Guenter! > > Also, I can't see my patches (which are already present in your > > "watchdog-next" branch) in linux-next/master. Is that expected, or I'm > > missing something? > > > My watchdog-next branch is for 0-day coverage only. It is not made > available in linux-next. linux-next pulls watchdog related changes > from the official watchdog repository at > git://www.linux-watchdog.org/linux-watchdog-next.git#master > > Guenter
