Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] Watchdog: introduce "pretimeout" into framework

[Guenter Roeck]

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:38:32PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> Hi Guenter.
> 
> Sorry for my poor English .
> let me explain this :
> 
> On 22 May 2015 at 21:23, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 05/22/2015 03:46 AM, Fu Wei wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Timo,
> >>
> > [ ... ]
> >
> >> So I am still trying to improve pretimeout support :-)
> >
> >
> > Is there anything still missing from it ?
> >
> >> If I can make pretimeout merged, may be you can try pretimeout to
> >> implement early_timeout_sec function?
> >
> >
> > Not sure how one would or even could do that.
> >
> > Do you mean "implement early_pretimeout_sec", by any chance ?
> 
> I mean: using pretimeout to implement the function you want, instead
> of early_pretimeout_sec
> 
How would this work if the watchdog hardware doesn't support pretimeout ?

Pretimeout and early timeout are two logically different functions, with
different goals, so I don't entirely (if at all) understand why it would
make sense to tie them together.

Can you elaborate why you think this would be a good idea ?

Thanks,
Guenter
--
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/