Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] watchdog: add support for sl28cpld watchdog
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2020-06-05 08:14:37
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, linux-hwmon, linux-pwm, linux-watchdog, lkml
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:14 AM Michael Walle [off-list ref] wrote:
Add support for the watchdog of the sl28cpld board management controller. This is part of a multi-function device driver.
...
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
Didn't find a user of this. ...
+static bool nowayout = WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT; +module_param(nowayout, bool, 0); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nowayout, "Watchdog cannot be stopped once started (default=" + __MODULE_STRING(WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT) ")"); + +static int timeout; +module_param(timeout, int, 0); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(timeout, "Initial watchdog timeout in seconds");
Guenter ACKed this, but I'm wondering why we still need module parameters... ...
+ int ret; + + ret = regmap_read(wdt->regmap, wdt->offset + WDT_COUNT, &val); + + return (ret < 0) ? 0 : val;
Besides extra parentheses and questionable ' < 0' part, the following would look better I think ret = ... if (ret) return 0; return val; ...
+ int ret; + + ret = regmap_write(wdt->regmap, wdt->offset + WDT_TIMEOUT, timeout); + if (!ret) + wdd->timeout = timeout; + + return ret;
Similar story here: ret = ... if (ret) return ret; wdd->... = ... return 0; ...
+ ret = regmap_read(wdt->regmap, wdt->offset + WDT_CTRL, &status);
+ if (ret < 0)
What ' < 0' means? Do we have some positive return values? Ditto for all your code.
+ return ret;
...
+ if (status & WDT_CTRL_EN) {
+ sl28cpld_wdt_start(wdd);+ set_bit(WDOG_HW_RUNNING, &wdd->status);
Do you need atomic op here? Why?
+ }
...
+static const struct of_device_id sl28cpld_wdt_of_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "kontron,sl28cpld-wdt" },+ {},No comma.
+};
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel