On Friday 31 October 2014 21:57:56 Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 31/10/2014 at 21:50:05 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote : > > On Friday 31 October 2014 21:45:58 Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > To be able to make the watchdog driver independent from the mach/ includes, pass > > > the system timer register space as a resource. > > > > > > Also, change the name to avoid conflicting with the at91sam9 watchdog driver. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Doing this change as a separate patch breaks bisection because now the device > > name no longer matches untile the other patch is applied too. > > > > Yeah, I was not sure how important that was as there is no user of the > watchdog in the kernel. My thinking was that both patch can then go > through different trees. > > I can definitely squash them. AFAICT, arch/arm/configs/at91rm9200_defconfig enables the device and it gets registered through at91_add_standard_devices. You definitely have my Ack to merge the mach-at91 patch through the watchdog tree. Arnd -- 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
