RE: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: watchdog: aspeed: Add property for WDT SW reset

[Chin-Ting Kuo]

Hi Guenter,

Thanks for the review.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 3:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: watchdog: aspeed: Add property for WDT
> SW reset
> 
> On 10/7/24 10:59, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 02:34:05PM +0800, Chin-Ting Kuo wrote:
> >> Add "aspeed,restart-sw" property to distinguish normal WDT reset from
> >> system restart triggered by SW consciously.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chin-Ting Kuo <chin-ting_kuo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>   .../bindings/watchdog/aspeed,ast2400-wdt.yaml         | 11
> +++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git
> >> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/aspeed,ast2400-wdt.yaml
> >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/aspeed,ast2400-wdt.yaml
> >> index be78a9865584..6cc3604c295a 100644
> >> ---
> >> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/aspeed,ast2400-wdt.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/aspeed,ast2400-wdt.y
> >> +++ aml
> >> @@ -95,6 +95,17 @@ properties:
> >>         array with the first word defined using the
> AST2600_WDT_RESET1_* macros,
> >>         and the second word defined using the AST2600_WDT_RESET2_*
> macros.
> >>
> >> +  aspeed,restart-sw:
> >> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
> >> +    description: >
> >> +      Normally, ASPEED WDT reset may occur when system hangs or
> reboot
> >> +      triggered by SW consciously. However, system doesn't know
> whether the
> >> +      restart is triggered by SW consciously since the reset event flag is
> >> +      the same as normal WDT timeout reset. With this property, SW can
> >> +      restart the system immediately and directly without wait for WDT
> >> +      timeout occurs. The reset event flag is also different from the
> normal
> >> +      WDT reset. This property is only supported since AST2600 platform.
> >
> > Why can't this be implicit based on the ast2600 compatible string?
> >
> 
> Same question here.
> 
Yes, this property will be implicit based on the ast2600 compatible string
in the next patch series.

> Guenter

Chin-Ting