* [PATCH] watchdog: sbsa-gwdt: clamp timeout before updating wdd->timeout
@ 2025-12-18 2:31 Zhu Ling
2025-12-18 4:53 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zhu Ling @ 2025-12-18 2:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-watchdog; +Cc: wim, linux, linux-kernel, Zhu Ling
sbsa_gwdt_set_timeout() updates wdd->timeout before clamping the user
requested value to the hardware-supported range. As a result,
WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT and sysfs may report a timeout larger than what is
actually programmed into the hardware.
Clamp the timeout first and then update wdd->timeout so that
userspace-visible values always reflect the effective hardware
timeout.
Signed-off-by: Zhu Ling <1536943441@qq.com>
---
drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
index 6ce1bfb39..826469645 100644
--- a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
+++ b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
@@ -155,8 +155,8 @@ static int sbsa_gwdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd,
{
struct sbsa_gwdt *gwdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
- wdd->timeout = timeout;
timeout = clamp_t(unsigned int, timeout, 1, wdd->max_hw_heartbeat_ms / 1000);
+ wdd->timeout = timeout;
if (action)
sbsa_gwdt_reg_write((u64)gwdt->clk * timeout, gwdt);
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] watchdog: sbsa-gwdt: clamp timeout before updating wdd->timeout
2025-12-18 2:31 [PATCH] watchdog: sbsa-gwdt: clamp timeout before updating wdd->timeout Zhu Ling
@ 2025-12-18 4:53 ` Guenter Roeck
[not found] ` <tencent_8FC8A3A9BF39EB3529C9320DFC259E0CE607@qq.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2025-12-18 4:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhu Ling, linux-watchdog; +Cc: wim, linux-kernel
On 12/17/25 18:31, Zhu Ling wrote:
> sbsa_gwdt_set_timeout() updates wdd->timeout before clamping the user
> requested value to the hardware-supported range. As a result,
> WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT and sysfs may report a timeout larger than what is
> actually programmed into the hardware.
>
> Clamp the timeout first and then update wdd->timeout so that
> userspace-visible values always reflect the effective hardware
> timeout.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Ling <1536943441@qq.com>
> ---
> drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
> index 6ce1bfb39..826469645 100644
> --- a/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/sbsa_gwdt.c
> @@ -155,8 +155,8 @@ static int sbsa_gwdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdd,
> {
> struct sbsa_gwdt *gwdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
>
> - wdd->timeout = timeout;
> timeout = clamp_t(unsigned int, timeout, 1, wdd->max_hw_heartbeat_ms / 1000);
> + wdd->timeout = timeout;
>
> if (action)
> sbsa_gwdt_reg_write((u64)gwdt->clk * timeout, gwdt);
This is wrong. With max_hw_heartbeat_ms set, the timeout value is not limited to
the hardware timeout and becomes a virtual timeout. If it is larger than the
maximum hardware timeout, the watchdog core will issue any necessary heartbeats.
The current code is perfectly correct.
NACK.
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: 回复: [PATCH] watchdog: sbsa-gwdt: clamp timeout before updating wdd->timeout
[not found] ` <tencent_8FC8A3A9BF39EB3529C9320DFC259E0CE607@qq.com>
@ 2025-12-19 15:41 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2025-12-19 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 1536943441, linux-watchdog; +Cc: wim, linux-kernel
On 12/19/25 01:46, 1536943441 wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> thank you for the detailed explanation.
>
> I misunderstood the watchdog core semantics here. With max_hw_heartbeat_ms set, the userspace timeout can represent a virtual timeout and is not expected to be limited by the single hardware timeout. Given that, my change is indeed wrong
> and I will drop this patch.
>
> One follow-up question: in my testing, "/sys/class/watchdog/watchdog0/max_timeout" always shows 0 for sbsa-gwdt. Should the driver set wdd->max_timeout in probe(), or is a 0 value expected when max_hw_heartbeat_ms/virtual timeouts are used?
>
The value is as expected, and the driver should not do anything. A value of 0
means "unlimited", which in practice means that the limit is UINT_MAX / 1000.
Turns out the attribute is not documented. We should add it to the ABI
documentation. If/when I find the time ...
Thanks,
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-12-19 15:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-12-18 2:31 [PATCH] watchdog: sbsa-gwdt: clamp timeout before updating wdd->timeout Zhu Ling
2025-12-18 4:53 ` Guenter Roeck
[not found] ` <tencent_8FC8A3A9BF39EB3529C9320DFC259E0CE607@qq.com>
2025-12-19 15:41 ` 回复: " Guenter Roeck
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®