Hello, On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 02:41:01PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > I'm not sure where a negative timeout could come from but making the > code more robust for no additional runtime cost is good nevertheless. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/watchdog/imxwd.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/imxwd.c b/drivers/watchdog/imxwd.c > index 31c3d0d85353..66e9f6848f74 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/imxwd.c > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/imxwd.c > @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ static int imx21_watchdog_set_timeout(struct imx_wd *priv, int timeout) > > dev_dbg(priv->dev, "%s: %d\n", __func__, timeout); > > - if (!timeout || timeout > 128) > + if (timeout <= 0 || timeout > 128) > return -EINVAL; This patch is broken because reset_cpu (in the same source file) calls set_timeout with timeout=-1 to reset the cpu immediatly. The wd command only parses non-negative values, so from there nothing strange should be expected. Returning -EINVAL on timeout=0 (which means "disable watchdog") is OK because the imx21 watchdog cannot be stopped. So in short: please drop this patch from next. Thanks Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
