On 11/26/2013 10:22 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
There was a minor bug in watchdog_init_timeout() where it would return an error code if someone specified an invalid parameter on the command line but then there was a valid parameter in the device tree as "timeout-sec". Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I thought that was on purpose. Problem as I see it is that users would expect the timeout to be set to the provided parameter, which would be silently ignored and replaced by timeout-sec if the parameter is wrong and timeout-sec is specified. Seems to me that the user should be informed about the problem, and not be permitted to provide invalid parameters. Thanks, Guenter
--- drivers/watchdog/watchdog_core.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/watchdog_core.c b/drivers/watchdog/watchdog_core.c index cec9b55..8d27753 100644 --- a/drivers/watchdog/watchdog_core.c +++ b/drivers/watchdog/watchdog_core.c @@ -82,12 +82,12 @@ int watchdog_init_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd, wdd->timeout = timeout_parm; return ret; } - if (timeout_parm) - ret = -EINVAL; - /* try to get the timeout_sec property */ + /* if no device tree then we're done */ if (dev == NULL || dev->of_node == NULL) - return ret; + return (timeout_parm) ? -EINVAL : ret;
( ) is unnecessary.
+ + /* try to get the timeout_sec property */ of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, "timeout-sec", &t); if (!watchdog_timeout_invalid(wdd, t) && t) wdd->timeout = t;
-- 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
