RE: [RFC PATCH v2] watchdog: ep93xx: Use the WatchDog Timer DriverCore.

[H Hartley Sweeten]

On Thursday, August 04, 2011 11:13 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 10:21:26AM -0700, H Hartley Sweeten wrote:
>> Convert the ep93xx watchdog driver to using the WatchDog Timer Driver Core.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Tested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxx>

Thanks!

>
> BTW, now that the driver uses watchdog core should we also select
> WATCHDOG_CORE in the Kconfig? If it is not enabled we get:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ep93xx_wdt_init':
> clkdev.c:(.init.text+0x2bd8): undefined reference to
> `watchdog_register_device'
> make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1

Of course.

I wasn't sure how Wim wanted to handle this.  I see two ways of doing it
in the Kconfig.

1) Each driver config option has a select WATCHDOG_CORE if it is required.

   Pro: all the watchdog drivers (that are available) are displayed
   Con: each driver needs to add the select if needed
   Side-effect: the WATCHDOG_CORE option could (should) be a hidden option

2) Separate the watchdog drivers into groups that need the WATCHDOG_CORE
   and those that don't then put a if WATCHDOG_CORE/endif around the ones
   that need it.

   Pro: keeps the Kconfig clean
   Con: the drivers that use WATCHDOG_CORE are not displayed unless the
        option is selected
   Con: defconfigs probably will need to be updated to select WATCHDOG_CORE

Wim, do you have any opinion on this?

> Other than that, you can also add my
>
> Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxx>
>
> if you like.

Thanks,
Hartley
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/