Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] watchdog: add support for sl28cpld watchdog

[Guenter Roeck]

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 05:09:11PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 06:52:00AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 6/5/20 3:50 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:24 PM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> Am 2020-06-05 10:14, schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:14 AM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > >>>> +static bool nowayout = WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT;
> > >>>> +module_param(nowayout, bool, 0);
> > >>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nowayout, "Watchdog cannot be stopped once started
> > >>>> (default="
> > >>>> +                               __MODULE_STRING(WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT)
> > >>>> ")");
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> +static int timeout;
> > >>>> +module_param(timeout, int, 0);
> > >>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(timeout, "Initial watchdog timeout in seconds");
> > >>>
> > >>> Guenter ACKed this, but I'm wondering why we still need module
> > >>> parameters...
> > >>
> > >> How would a user change the nowayout or the timeout? For the latter
> > >> there is
> > >> a device tree entry, but thats not easy changable by the user.
> > > 
> > > Yes, it's more question to VIm and Guenter than to you.
> > > 
> > 
> > Has support for providing module parameters with the kernel command line
> > been discontinued/deprecated, or did it run out of favor ? Sorry if I
> > missed that.
> 
> Latter according to Greg KH. One of the (plenty) examples [1].
> 
> [1]: https://www.mail-archive.com/driverdev-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg96495.html
> 
What is the suggested replacement ?

Guenter