I can include reset condition in struct maybe like this static const struct aspeed_wdt_config ast2600_config = { .ext_pulse_width_mask = 0xfffff, .irq_shift = 0, .irq_mask = GENMASK(31, 10), .compatible = "aspeed,ast2600-scu", .reset_event = AST2600_SYSTEM_RESET_EVENT, .watchdog_reset_flag = AST2600_WATCHDOG_RESET_FLAG, .extern_reset_flag = EXTERN_RESET_FLAG, .reset_flag_clear = AST2600_RESET_FLAG_CLEAR, }; in probe( ) we just call scu_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible(wdt->cfg->compatible); if (IS_ERR(scu_base)) return PTR_ERR(scu_base); ret = regmap_read(scu_base, wdt->cfg->reset_event, &status); if (ret) return ret; if ((status & POWERON_RESET_FLAG) == 0 && status & wdt->cfg->watchdog_reset_flag) wdt->wdd.bootstatus = (status & wdt->cfg->extern_reset_flag) ? WDIOF_EXTERN1 : WDIOF_CARDRESET; status = wdt->cfg->watchdog_reset_flag | POWERON_RESET_FLAG | wdt->cfg->extern_reset_flag; ret = regmap_write(scu_base, wdt->cfg->reset_event, status); Does this meet your expectations? On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 8:42 AM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2024-04-25 at 17:07 +0800, Peter Yin wrote: > > Regarding the AST2600 specification, the WDTn Timeout Status Register > > (WDT10) has bit 1 reserved. Bit 1 of the status register indicates > > on ast2500 if the boot was from the second boot source. > > It does not indicate that the most recent reset was triggered by > > the watchdog. The code should just be changed to set WDIOF_CARDRESET > > if bit 0 of the status register is set. However, this bit can be clear when > > watchdog register 0x0c bit1(Reset System after timeout) is enabled. > > Thereforce include SCU register to veriy WDIOF_EXTERN1 and WDIOF_CARDRESET > > in ast2600 SCU74 or ast2400/ast2500 SCU3C. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Yin <peteryin.openbmc@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/watchdog/aspeed_wdt.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > After this patch the probe() implementation is ~250loc with a whole > bunch of conditional behaviours based on the SoC version. Maybe it's > time to break it up into version-specific functions that are called > from the probe() implementation? > > Andrew