Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] watchdog: max77620: add support for the max77714 variant
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Date: 2021-11-29 22:16:26
Also in:
linux-rtc, linux-watchdog, lkml
Hi Guenter, On 29/11/21 22:56, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 11/29/21 1:24 PM, Luca Ceresoli wrote: [ ... ]quoted
quoted
quoted
+static const struct max77620_variant max77620_wdt_data = { + .wdt_info = { + .identity = "max77620-watchdog", + .options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING | WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE, + },That does not have to be, and should not be, part of device specific data, just because of the identity string.Ok, no problem, will fix, but I have two questions. First, what's the reason? Coding style or a functional difference? Usually const data is preferred to runtime assignment.wdt_info is not chip specific variant information as nothing but the identity string is different, and there is no technical need for that difference.quoted
Second: it's not clear how you expect it to be done. Looking into theI gave you three options to pick from.
Perhaps it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but I thought "either" introduces an alternative between two options (wiktionary confirms, FWIW). Reading your sentence in that perspective gave it a different meaning.
quoted
kernel it looks like almost all drivers set a constant string. I could find only one exception, f71808e_wdt: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.16-rc3/source/drivers/watchdog/f71808e_wdt.c#L471quoted
Either keep the current identity string, mark max77620_wdt_info as __ro_after_init and overwrite the identity string there during probeAnd also remove 'static' I guess. Hm, I don't love this, as above I tend to prefer static const when possible for file-scoped data.Where did I suggest to remove 'static', and what would be the benefit of making the variable global ?
You didn't. But since max77620_wdt_info is currently file-scoped, should it be modified during probe it would generate a weird situation in case one has both a max77714 and a max77620 on the same board (unlikely but possible), as two instances of the same driver would modify the same (static) data. But all of this discussion is getting quite theoretical as...
quoted
quoted
or add the structure to max77620_wdt and fill it out there.Do you mean like the following, untested, kind-of-pseudocode? struct max77620_wdt { struct device *dev; struct regmap *rmap; const struct max77620_variant *drv_data; + struct watchdog_info info; /* not a pointer! */ struct watchdog_device wdt_dev; }; and then, in probe: wdt->dev = dev; wdt->drv_data = (const struct max77620_variant *)id->driver_data; /* ... assign other wdt fields ... */ + strlcpy(wdt_dev->info.identity, id->name, \ + sizeof(wdt_dev->info.identity)); + wdt_dev->info.options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING | \ + WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE;For example, yes.quoted
Finally, what about simply: static const struct max77620_variant max77620_wdt_data = { .wdt_info = { - .identity = "max77620-watchdog", + .identity = "max77xxx-watchdog", .options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING | ... }, and always use that struct unconditionally? The max63xx_wdt.c driver seems to do that. Or, if this is an issue for backward compatibility (is it?), just leave max77620_wdt_data and the .identity field will always be "max77620-watchdog" even when using a MAX77714.
...I'll go for this last, simplest option: same struct, same string, always. -- Luca