From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932172Ab1LEMZP (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:25:15 -0500 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:46690 "EHLO earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932132Ab1LEMZO (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:25:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 12:26:49 +0000 From: Alan Cox To: Wolfgang Denk Cc: Wolfram Sang , Heiko Schocher , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Roese Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC, watchdog: add generic wdt driver API Message-ID: <20111205122649.6fc6aed2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20111204170810.8370625EA22@gemini.denx.de> References: <1322992423-21683-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de> <20111204125928.GB5788@pengutronix.de> <20111204170810.8370625EA22@gemini.denx.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.24.7; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 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 > that we have a number of customers who consider the existing wdt > support unsufficient for their use cases. We've been using it on all > kinds on PPC systems, and now on ARM as well. > > We will not fight for inclusion of this driver, we just wat to know if > it's worth investing efforts to get it accepted or if this is a lost > case. I think it would be better to start from the needed feature list than the implementation of an old and wildly different pile of code. Then discuss adding those features that are relevant to the current framework - which ought to be relatively easy now each watchdog is a set of methods. Alan