On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 02:34:31PM -0600, Jerry Hoemann wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:25:05PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > The core will print out details now. > > > > Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/watchdog/hpwdt.c | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/hpwdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/hpwdt.c > > index ef30c7e9728d..db1bf6f546ae 100644 > > --- a/drivers/watchdog/hpwdt.c > > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/hpwdt.c > > @@ -311,8 +311,7 @@ static int hpwdt_init_one(struct pci_dev *dev, > > goto error_init_nmi_decoding; > > > > watchdog_set_nowayout(&hpwdt_dev, nowayout); > > - if (watchdog_init_timeout(&hpwdt_dev, soft_margin, NULL)) > > - dev_warn(&dev->dev, "Invalid soft_margin: %d.\n", soft_margin); > > + watchdog_init_timeout(&hpwdt_dev, soft_margin, NULL); > > I applied patches 1,2 & 6 in testing. > > Note, that hpwdt is passing NULL as the third parameter to watchdog_init_timeout(). > > The second patch in this series is using "dev" as input to dev_err and dev_warn. > > This results in the following in dmesg when trying to load hpwdt w/ an invalid soft_margin: > > > [ 80.848160] (NULL device *): driver supplied timeout (4294967295) out of range > [ 80.855429] (NULL device *): falling back to default timeout (30) > Good find. Thanks a lot for testing! We'll have to address this. Wolfram - it looks like we'll need separate error message handling for situations where dev is NULL. We may have to leave it up to the parent after all to display a message in that case (since we do want to see the driver name). > > if the call in hpwdt driver is changed to: > > if (watchdog_init_timeout(&hpwdt_dev, soft_margin, &dev->dev)) > > > We see the message like we'd desire: > > [ 2061.167100] hpwdt 0000:01:00.0: driver supplied timeout (4294967295) out of range > [ 2061.174633] hpwdt 0000:01:00.0: falling back to default timeout (30) > > > > watchdog_init_timeout() uses dev to "try to get the timeout_sec property" > > I am not familiar with this part of the core and what effect having the hpwdt > driver pass in dev to watchdog_init_timeout would have. (I.e. is the > change safe?) > Yes, in general it is safe. watchdog_init_timeout() only uses dev to extract a timeout value from devicetree (and now to display error messages). > Guenter, can you help on this question? > > Note, hpwdt isn't the only watch dog device that is passing NULL to > watchdog_init_timeout. > That is indeed a problem: the pointer will be NULL if there is no parent device (such as in softdog.c). Otherwise it should never be NULL. Thanks, Guenter
