Hi Guenter,
On 2/13/20 7:12 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Does that really have to be decided at runtime, by the user ?
> How about doing it with a module parameter ?
>
> Also, I am not sure if an ioctl is the best means to do this, if it indeed
> makes sense to decide it at runtime. ioctl implies an open watchdog device,
> which interferes with the watchdog daemon. This means that the watchdog
> daemon would have to be modified to support this, making this a quite expensive
> change. It also implies that the action would have to be known when the
> watchdog daemon is started, suggesting that a module parameter should be
> sufficient.
Yes, fair points. I went with ioctl() because the timeout can be changed
in runtime. But you're right, I'll look into making it a module
parameter instead.
Thanks for the review and time,
Dmitry
