Hello and again thanks for your comments
Guenter Roeck schrieb am 29.07.22 um 17:42:
On 7/29/22 04:33, David Müller wrote:
+ /*
+ * use two accesses with different values to make sure
+ * that a combination of a previous single access and
+ * the ones below wi0th the same value are not falsely
with
Yeah, I saw it a minute after sending this patch.
+ snprintf((char *)n->name, sizeof(n->name) - 1, DRV_NAME ".%d", idx);
Better use scnprintf().
Ok, will fix.
+ priv->wdt_res.name = n->name;
Is it really necessary to have a unique resource name for each instance
(or a resource name in the first place) ?
I find it quite handy to have unique resource names displayed for
example in "/proc/ioports":
root@test:~# cat /proc/ioports
[...]
0a00-0a0f : pnp 00:01
0a00-0a01 : exar_wdt.0
0a08-0a09 : exar_wdt.1
[...]
