RE: [PATCH V1 5/6] watchdog: da9062: DA9062 watchdog driver
From: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <hidden>
Date: 2015-05-07 19:02:50
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-rtc, linux-watchdog, lkml
On 07 May 2015 18:58 Guenter Roeck wrote: Hi Guenter,
quoted
+static void da9062_apply_window_protection(struct da9062_watchdog *wdt) +{ + unsigned long delay = msecs_to_jiffies(DA9062_RESET_PROTECTION_MS); + unsigned long timeout = wdt->j_time_stamp + delay; + unsigned long now = jiffies; + unsigned int diff_ms; + + /* if time-limit has not elapsed then wait for remainder */ + if (time_before(now, timeout)) { + diff_ms = jiffies_to_msecs(timeout-now); + dev_dbg(wdt->hw->dev, + "Delaying watchdog ping by %u msecs\n", diff_ms);I would not bother about the dev_dbg, but that is your call.
.. easily removed ... I only have it in because I am worried about the case when the watchdog gets kicked too often & quickly. If it is okay, I will leave that in because the edge-case should be made known somewhere. Perhaps I will make it a better debug description like "Watchdog kicked too quickly. Delaying %d ms"
quoted
+ mdelay(diff_ms);Can you use usleep_range() ?
I put mdelay() ?? I meant to put msleep(). That's probably what I need to do now. I did take a look at usleep_range() as I trawled for the best delay call, but usleep_range() requires a lower and upper bound and I only have a lower bound in my case -- also, the kernel docs "Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt" suggest: SLEEPING FOR ~USECS OR SMALL MSECS ( 10us - 20ms): * Use usleep_range SLEEPING FOR LARGER MSECS ( 10ms+ ) * Use msleep [...] I guess the majority of the time there would be zero delay-time and the code branch wouldn't be triggered anyway, but when it is triggered the time can be anything up to 300 msecs. So I was intending to use msleep().
Othewise looks good. BTW, I had to do something similar in drivers/hwmon/pmbus/zl6100.c; this is where the idea comes from.
Ah, I see, thanks. Regards, Steve