Hi Arnd,
Great thanks for your suggestion :-)
feedback inline below
On 15 May 2015 at 22:04, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Friday 15 May 2015 19:24:48 fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> +static void watchdog_check_min_max_pretimeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
>> +{
>> + /*
>> + * Check that we have valid min and max pretimeout values, if
>> + * not reset them both to 0 (=not used or unknown)
>> + */
>> + if (wdd->min_pretimeout > wdd->max_pretimeout) {
>> + pr_info("Invalid min and max pretimeout, resetting to 0!\n");
>> + wdd->min_pretimeout = 0;
>> + wdd->max_pretimeout = 0;
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I would probably just fold this function into the existing
> watchdog_check_min_max_timeout() and check both normal and pre-timeout
> there.
yes, I can do that , and that is good idea
>
>> +/**
>> + * watchdog_init_pretimeout() - initialize the pretimeout field
>> + * @pretimeout_parm: pretimeout module parameter
>> + * @dev: Device that stores the timeout-sec property
>> + *
>> + * Initialize the pretimeout field of the watchdog_device struct with either
>> + * the pretimeout module parameter (if it is valid value) or the timeout-sec
>> + * property (only if it is a valid value and the timeout_parm is out of bounds).
>> + * If none of them are valid then we keep the old value (which should normally
>> + * be the default pretimeout value.
>> + *
>> + * A zero is returned on success and -EINVAL for failure.
>> + */
>> +int watchdog_init_pretimeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd,
>> + unsigned int pretimeout_parm, struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + int ret = 0;
>> + u32 timeouts[2];
>> +
>> + watchdog_check_min_max_pretimeout(wdd);
>> +
>> + /* try to get the timeout module parameter first */
>> + if (!watchdog_pretimeout_invalid(wdd, pretimeout_parm) &&
>> + pretimeout_parm) {
>> + wdd->pretimeout = pretimeout_parm;
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + if (pretimeout_parm)
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + /* try to get the timeout_sec property */
>> + if (!dev || !dev->of_node)
>> + return ret;
>> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(dev->of_node,
>> + "timeout-sec", timeouts, 2);
>> + if (!watchdog_pretimeout_invalid(wdd, timeouts[1]) && timeouts[1])
>> + wdd->pretimeout = timeouts[1];
>> + else
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(watchdog_init_pretimeout);
>
> Same here: the function is very similar to the watchdog_init_timeout
> function, and it reads the same property, so just do both here.
>
> The easiest way for that is probably to use of_find_property()
> and of_prop_next_u32() to read the two numbers.
integrate watchdog_init_pretimeout and watchdog_init_timeout will be a
little hard,
we may need to change this API to :
watchdog_init_timeouts(struct watchdog_device *wdd, unsigned int timeout_parm,
unsigned int pretimeout_parm, struct device *dev)
then we need to update all the watchdog drivers which use this API,
maybe we can do this in a individual patchset, after this pretimeout
patch is merged.
Is that OK ? :-) any thought?
>
> Arnd
>
--
Best regards,
Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
