Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote:

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote:

quoted

Tested on an at91sam9260 board (evk-pro3)

Signed-off-by: Fabio Porcedda <redacted>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt      | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c                     | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..65c1755
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+* Atmel Watchdog Timers
+
+** at91sam9-wdt
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible: must be "atmel,at91sam9260-wdt".
+- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
+  region.
+
+Optional properties:
+- timeout: contains the watchdog timeout in seconds.
+
+Example:
+
+     watchdog@fffffd40 {
+             compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260-wdt";
+             reg = <0xfffffd40 0x10>;
+             timeout = <10>;
+     };

diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c
index 05e1be8..c9e6bfa 100644
--- a/drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c
+++ b/drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c

@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
 #include <linux/timer.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
 #include <linux/uaccess.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>

 #include "at91sam9_wdt.h"

@@ -254,6 +255,14 @@ static struct miscdevice at91wdt_miscdev = {
      .fops           = &at91wdt_fops,
 };

+static inline void __init at91wdt_probe_dt(struct device_node *node)
+{
+     if (!node)
+             return;
+
+     of_property_read_u32(node, "timeout", &heartbeat);
+}
+

In patch #1 you add a function to do this, and then you don't make use
of it here ?

Or am i missing something?

I'm using it on the patch #2 for the orion_wdt driver.
Do you think it's better to join the #1 and the #2 patch?

It makes little sense doing this here, because you are going to have
to clean this up sometime very soon and use the helper, unless there
is a very good reason not to use the helper.

   Andrew