Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] watchdog: imx7ulp_wdt: move post_rcs_wait into struct imx_wdt_hw_feature

[Guenter Roeck]

On 7/29/24 14:16, Frank Li wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 11:12:13PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > Le 29/07/2024 à 22:06, Frank Li a écrit :
> > > Move post_rcs_wait into struct imx_wdt_hw_feature to simple code logic for
> > > difference compatible string.
> > >
> > > i.MX93 watchdog needn't wait 2.5 clocks after RCS is done. So needn't set
> > > post_rcs_wait.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux-0h96xk9xTtrk1uMJSBkQmQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alice Guo <alice.guo-3arQi8VN3Tc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Ye Li <ye.li-3arQi8VN3Tc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li-3arQi8VN3Tc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Chagne from v3 to v4:
> > > - Go back to v2 according to Guenter's feedback
> > > Change from v2 to v3:
> > > - Set post_rcs_wait to false explicitly to maintain code consistency
> > > - Add Guenter review tag.
> > > Change from v1 to v2:
> > > - Combine to one patch
> > > ---
> > >    drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c | 21 +++++++++------------
> > >    1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > index 94914a22daff7..3a75a6f98f8f0 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(nowayout, "Watchdog cannot be stopped once started (default="
> > >    struct imx_wdt_hw_feature {
> > >    	bool prescaler_enable;
> > > +	bool post_rcs_wait;
> > >    	u32 wdog_clock_rate;
> > >    };
> > > @@ -62,7 +63,6 @@ struct imx7ulp_wdt_device {
> > >    	struct watchdog_device wdd;
> > >    	void __iomem *base;
> > >    	struct clk *clk;
> > > -	bool post_rcs_wait;
> > >    	bool ext_reset;
> > >    	const struct imx_wdt_hw_feature *hw;
> > >    };
> > > @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static int imx7ulp_wdt_wait_rcs(struct imx7ulp_wdt_device *wdt)
> > >    		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > >    	/* Wait 2.5 clocks after RCS done */
> > > -	if (wdt->post_rcs_wait)
> > > +	if (wdt->hw->post_rcs_wait)
> > >    		usleep_range(wait_min, wait_min + 2000);
> > >    	return ret;
> > > @@ -334,15 +334,6 @@ static int imx7ulp_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >    	/* The WDOG may need to do external reset through dedicated pin */
> > >    	imx7ulp_wdt->ext_reset = of_property_read_bool(dev->of_node, "fsl,ext-reset-output");
> > > -	imx7ulp_wdt->post_rcs_wait = true;
> > > -	if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node,
> > > -				    "fsl,imx8ulp-wdt")) {
> > > -		dev_info(dev, "imx8ulp wdt probe\n");
> > > -		imx7ulp_wdt->post_rcs_wait = false;
> > > -	} else {
> > > -		dev_info(dev, "imx7ulp wdt probe\n");
> > > -	}
> > > -
> > >    	wdog = &imx7ulp_wdt->wdd;
> > >    	wdog->info = &imx7ulp_wdt_info;
> > >    	wdog->ops = &imx7ulp_wdt_ops;
> > > @@ -403,6 +394,12 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops imx7ulp_wdt_pm_ops = {
> > >    static const struct imx_wdt_hw_feature imx7ulp_wdt_hw = {
> > >    	.prescaler_enable = false,
> > >    	.wdog_clock_rate = 1000,
> > > +	.post_rcs_wait = true,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct imx_wdt_hw_feature imx8ulp_wdt_hw = {
> > > +	.prescaler_enable = false,
> > > +	.wdog_clock_rate = 1000,
> > >    };
> > >    static const struct imx_wdt_hw_feature imx93_wdt_hw = {
> > > @@ -411,7 +408,7 @@ static const struct imx_wdt_hw_feature imx93_wdt_hw = {
> > >    };
> > >    static const struct of_device_id imx7ulp_wdt_dt_ids[] = {
> > > -	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx8ulp-wdt", .data = &imx7ulp_wdt_hw, },
> > > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx8ulp-wdt", .data = &imx8ulp_wdt_hw, },
> >
> > Nitpick: while touching something here, should imx8ulp be after imx7ulp?
>
> Yes, it should be better.
>
> Guenter: do you think it is okay to move it after 7ulp?
Sure

Guenter

> Frank
>
> > CJ
> >
> > >    	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx7ulp-wdt", .data = &imx7ulp_wdt_hw, },
> > >    	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx93-wdt", .data = &imx93_wdt_hw, },
> > >    	{ /* sentinel */ }