On 18 May 2015 16:28 Guenter Roeck wrote:

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 02:15:01PM +0000, Opensource [Steve Twiss]
wrote:

quoted

On 15 May 2015 21:20 Guenter Roeck,

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+
+/* E_WDG_WARN interrupt handler */
+static irqreturn_t da9062_wdt_wdg_warn_irq_handler(int irq, void*data)
+{
+	struct da9062_watchdog *wdt = data;
+
+	dev_notice(wdt->hw->dev, "Watchdog timeout warning trigger.\n");
+	return IRQ_HANDLED;
+}
+

On 15 May 2015 13:58 Guenter Roeck wrote:

 [...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+
+	irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "WDG_WARN");
+	if (irq < 0) {
+		dev_err(wdt->hw->dev, "Failed to get IRQ.\n");
+		ret = irq;

Hi Steve,

Hi Guenter,

Since the interrupt is optional, the driver should also not fail to load
if no interrupt is assigned to it in the first place.

Yeah. I've been thinking about it and I agree now. I'll erase the handler. 

On a separate note, there was a comment stating that the da9062 watchdog
is identical to the da9063 watchdog. If so, why can't you just use the da9063
watchdog driver ?

Well, the short answer to this is, it's not the same. I was just in the process of
replying to that other thread. The OnKey and RTC are functionally similar, so I
am going to look at integrating the two drivers in some future patch sets, but
the watchdog is definitely not based upon DA9063.

I did mention this in a previous thread: 
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/6/505

Regards,
Steve