On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Fabio, > >> > I must admit that the different iterations of this patch only made it better. >> > I like the idea that you are proposing here (put the default timeout in the >> > watchdog_device struct and use a helper function to set the timeout parameter >> > value or the timeout-sec dt value). To be able to use other mechanism in the >> > future also, I think it make more sense to pass the device instead of the >> > device_node. >> >> If i understand correctly you want to use "struct platform_device" >> instead of "struct device_node", >> in the function watchdog_init_timeout? > > No struct device instead of struct device_node. > >> > I also detailed your documentation a bit more and incorporated above changes >> > in an adjusted patch. Can you have a look at it and if OK for you I will put >> > it in linux-watchdog-next as your v10 :-). >> >> That's good for sure :) > > Will add it to the linux-watchdog-next tree today. > In a few minutes I will send the v8 patch set. Best regards -- Fabio Porcedda > Kind regards, > Wim. > -- 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
