Re: [PATCH 0/2] DS1374 Watchdog fixes

[Moritz Fischer]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:22:10PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:58:36PM -0700, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:58:24AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > 
> > > Ah, I missed the "n" in various #ifndef statements.
> > >
> > > I can't really comment on how to solve that; I simply don't know.
> > > Also, even with a dt property, it still would be necessary to have
> > > a non-DT means to configure one or the other. Making whatever solution
> > > backward compatible also seems tricky; I don't have a solution for that
> > > problem either.
> > 
> > How does one do these things in a non-dt context? Platform data? I'd let
> 
> Platform data is out of favor. You'd probably want to use device properties
> (see drivers/base/property.c). Question though is if this is considered
> configuration, hardware description, or both. Presumably the watchdog
> only makes sense if the reset signal is wired, and the alarm only makes
> sense if the interrupt is wired, but what if both are wired ?

To make things worse you can even remap the reset output to the INT pin
(which my platform does).

I'll look at device properties. Thanks for the pointer.

> 
> > the MFD select the 'mode'. Maybe being backwards compatible isn't
> > possible in any case. Is there a rule somewhere that we guarantee you'll
> > never have to change your CONFIG_FOO options?
> > 
> 
> That would be nice, but no, there is no such rule. You can probably argue
> that no published kernel configuration enables the watchdog flag,
> so there is nothing to be concerned about.

Alright, cool. Thanks

Moritz

PS: Haven't forgotten about the cros-ec-hwmon patch that I sent out ...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature