On 23/04/12 12:35, viresh kumar wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Irk! Have you actually tested this? > > Yes. But with incorrect base address. I passed timers address by mistake. Ah, that explains why it worked. I suppose you do have additional patches that fix the IRQ request bit? >> The DT binding indicates: >> - reg : Specify the base address and the size of the TWD watchdog >> register window. >> >> while all the offsets in smp_twd.h are expressed in bytes from the TWD >> *timer* base. So you have to either fix these offsets (which breaks >> potential users of the non-DT version of the driver), or correct the >> base when using DT. > > You are correct. Which one do you prefer: > - Change bindings to pass timers base address No. We already discussed this on LAK, and the outcome was the current binding, so let's not change that again. > - subtract 0x20 from base address for DT case That's a possibility. > - something else. Given that no in-tree platform seem to be using this watchdog (at least a quick grep didn't reveal anything), I'd be inclined to simply change the offset in smp_twd.h and let them break. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
