From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752795AbZGVQTL (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:19:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752171AbZGVQTK (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:19:10 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:49991 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752009AbZGVQTJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:19:09 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:19:20 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Simon Braunschmidt Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wim@iguana.be Subject: Re: Handling multiple watchdogs Message-ID: <20090722171920.505ffc4b@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4A672B97.1070704@emlix.com> References: <4A672B97.1070704@emlix.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.14.7; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:09:11 +0200 Simon Braunschmidt wrote: > Hi > > I have two watchdogs on my board that I both want to handle. What would > be the proper approach in this case? Fixing the watchdog core to create a class of watchdog drivers and treating the existing /dev/watchdog as a back compatibility hack. It's been talked about for a very long time but not done, although I believe Wim had some test code at one point ? Alan