On 06/27/2016 02:37 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Nitpick: If we consider pretimeout == timeout to be invalid, we should reject it here
as well. So this should be >=.
I agree to that.
to the next version. I'd suggest to wait a bit to give Wolfram time to provide input,
though.
I liked the is_visible() change right away, so these patches are fine.
Guenter, what is your take on upstreaming the softdog pretimeout
support? I'd think it would be good to have for testing purposes. It
would also help me to upstream the busybox patch for the watchdog
applet.
Sure, but the current patch series doesn't include watchdog_notify_pretimeout(),
or am I missing something ?
Guenter
--
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
