Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] watchdog: add pretimeout support to the core

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 08/29/2016 09:50 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
+	} else {
 		wdd->timeout = timeout;
+		/* Disable pretimeout if it doesn't fit the new timeout */
+		if (wdd->pretimeout >= wdd->timeout)
+			wdd->pretimeout = 0;

I wonder if we should add a warning here? What do you think?


IMHO it is not vitally needed, but some message on KERN_INFO level may
be considered as user-friendly, watchdog subsystem and drivers are
historically verbose. Guenter, do you have an opinion on the topic?

I also note that this runtime behaviour is properly described in
the collateral documentation change.

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux