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

From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Mon Jul 29 2024 - 17:51:22 EST


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 */ }