On 12/12/19 10:19 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:38:29PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> >> >> On 12/11/2019 5:35 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On 12/11/19 1:02 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: >>>> Including au1000.h from the machine specific header directory prevents >>>> this driver from being built on any other platforms (MIPS included). >>>> Since we do not use any definitions, drop it. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c | 2 -- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c >>>> index 25a92857b217..aeca22f7450e 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c >>>> @@ -41,8 +41,6 @@ >>>> #include <linux/uaccess.h> >>>> #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h> >>>> -#include <asm/mach-au1x00/au1000.h> >>>> - >>>> #define MTX1_WDT_INTERVAL (5 * HZ) >>>> static int ticks = 100 * HZ; >>>> >>> >>> Given that this is nothing but yet another gpio watchdog driver, I'd >>> personally rather have it merged with gpio_wdt.c. On a higher level, >>> cleaning up old-style watchdog drivers, without converting them to >>> using the watchdog core, is a waste of time. >> >> If that makes you feel any better, I was not planning on going further >> than that, and yes, removing this driver and using gpio_wdt.c would be >> the way to go, this driver greatly predates gpio_wdt.c and I have since >> then not had access to my MTX-1 platforms which is why this did not >> happen. We can attempt a "blind conversion" without testing, but what >> good would that make, not sure. >> > > It sounds like this is a purely cosmetical change to improve test build > coverage for a more or less obsolete driver. No, that doesn't make me feel > better; I get way too many of those lately. Worse, some of those test build > "improvements" actually end up breaking real builds, which then costs me > and others even more time to track down. > > We should really discourage that. Is there some challenge going on somewhere, > along the line of "improve test build coverage" ? Not really, the only challenge would be access to the original hardware in order to remove the driver and migrate over to gpio_wdt, which is low risk, but the watchdog on that platform has bitten me before. -- Florian
