From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Matt Porter <porter@cox.net>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal for a new watchdog interface using sysfs
Date: 14 Feb 2003 14:57:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1045234657.7958.23.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200302141348.h1EDmHwZ004754@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:48, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> I admit not having thoroughly read the source to check - is the userspace API
> for accessing all these chips fairly uniform and rational, so that a user
> program can be reasonably sure that if stat("/dev/watchdog") returns zero, that
> it knows how to deal with it? Or are they all sufficiently close to the "keep
> reloading a countdown timer from userspace, and if it ever doesn't get reloaded,
> kick the kernel in the seat of the pants" programming model? Of course, even
> a disagreement on the units of the timer could be bad - a seconds/milliseconds
> clash could result is a *real* fast lack-of-joy situation.. ;)
watchdog interfaces have a defined API, which they all follow fairly closely. That
makes adding watchdogs as a device class nice and easy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-14 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-13 3:16 Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 4:27 ` Daniel Pittman
2003-02-13 7:32 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 11:55 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-13 15:34 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 16:04 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-02-13 15:51 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 19:07 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-13 18:31 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 19:19 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-02-13 21:12 ` Scott Murray
2003-02-13 22:58 ` Matt Porter
2003-02-13 22:05 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-14 0:47 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-14 14:48 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-14 15:32 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-14 17:55 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-14 19:02 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-14 20:43 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-14 21:12 ` Joel Becker
2003-02-14 13:48 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-02-14 14:57 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2003-02-13 16:04 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-13 18:20 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 18:21 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-13 23:04 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-14 22:12 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-14 21:35 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-14 23:17 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-15 1:54 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-15 8:27 ` Cort Dougan
2003-02-15 9:13 ` John Bradford
2003-02-15 21:03 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-15 20:37 ` John Bradford
2003-02-15 12:42 ` Ingo Oeser
2003-02-15 17:26 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-19 5:24 ` Rusty Lynch
2003-02-20 21:19 ` Jakob Oestergaard
2003-02-20 22:36 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1045234657.7958.23.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=porter@cox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®