| Message ID | 20190414110933.30529-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Geert Uytterhoeven |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFT] watchdog: da9063_wdt: parse DT for timeout value, too | expand |
On 4/14/19 4:09 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > And make sure the final obtained value gets properly scaled. Remove two > empty lines to group the initialization blocks while we are here. > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> > --- > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD), checking the initial > timeout value via sysfs. I didn't test handover from bootloader because my > bootloader neither supports WDT or I2C out of the box. > > drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c | 10 ++++++---- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c > index 06eb9070203c..3d65e92a4e3f 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c > @@ -208,18 +208,20 @@ static int da9063_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > wdd->min_timeout = DA9063_WDT_MIN_TIMEOUT; > wdd->max_timeout = DA9063_WDT_MAX_TIMEOUT; > wdd->min_hw_heartbeat_ms = DA9063_RESET_PROTECTION_MS; > - wdd->timeout = DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT; > wdd->parent = dev; > - > wdd->status = WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT_INIT_STATUS; > > watchdog_set_restart_priority(wdd, 128); > - > watchdog_set_drvdata(wdd, da9063); > > + /* Set default timeout, maybe override it with DT value, scale it */ > + wdd->timeout = DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT; > + watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, 0, dev); > + da9063_wdt_set_timeout(wdd, wdd->timeout); > + > /* Change the timeout to the default value if the watchdog is running */ > if (da9063_wdt_is_running(da9063)) { > - da9063_wdt_update_timeout(da9063, DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT); > + da9063_wdt_update_timeout(da9063, wdd->timeout); > set_bit(WDOG_HW_RUNNING, &wdd->status); > } > >
Hi Wolfram, On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD), checking the initial > timeout value via sysfs. I didn't test handover from bootloader because my > bootloader neither supports WDT or I2C out of the box. Can I please check there is no mistake in your description. I have been repeatedly told by the hardware engineers here, (for the past 6 years) it is not possible. But, you seem to have an R-Car H2 with the AD silicon version of DA9063? Regards, Steve
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 08:11:16AM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote: > Hi Wolfram, > > On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD), checking the initial > > timeout value via sysfs. I didn't test handover from bootloader because my > > bootloader neither supports WDT or I2C out of the box. > > Can I please check there is no mistake in your description. I have been repeatedly > told by the hardware engineers here, (for the past 6 years) it is not possible. > But, you seem to have an R-Car H2 with the AD silicon version of DA9063? I am confused, what is not possible? That I have an AD version? Yes, we found that out when we worked on the RTC recently. It is an early version of the Lager development board. I have no numbers but my assumption is there are not too many out there.
Hi Wolfram, No problem. On 15 April 2019 10:29, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT] watchdog: da9063_wdt: parse DT for timeout value, too > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 08:11:16AM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote: > > Hi Wolfram, > > > > On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD) > > > > Can I please check there is no mistake in your description. I have been repeatedly > > told by the hardware engineers here, (for the past 6 years) it is not possible. > > But, you seem to have an R-Car H2 with the AD silicon version of DA9063? > > I am confused, what is not possible? That I have an AD version? Yes, we > found that out when we worked on the RTC recently. Sure, I know, people have been requesting continued support for DA9063 AD silicon for years. The original DA9063 Linux driver was sent to LKML with AD support. > It is an early version of the Lager development board. I have no numbers > but my assumption is there are not too many out there. Thanks, yes, there is interest from the hardware engineers here. Thanks for the confirmation about your board. I will inform them about the DA9063 AD silicon on the Renesas Lager board -- and I will let you know their response. Regards, Steve
> > I am confused, what is not possible? That I have an AD version? Yes, we > > found that out when we worked on the RTC recently. > > Sure, I know, people have been requesting continued support for DA9063 AD silicon > for years. The original DA9063 Linux driver was sent to LKML with AD support. I see. Well, unlike the RTC patches recently, this watchdog patch is independent of the variant AFAICS, or?
On 15 April 2019 12:04, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > Sure, I know, people have been requesting continued support for DA9063 AD silicon > > for years. The original DA9063 Linux driver was sent to LKML with AD support. > > I see. Well, unlike the RTC patches recently, this watchdog patch is > independent of the variant AFAICS, or? Agreed! I am going to test your watchdog changes with a later silicon version later today and I expect no problems. Regards, Steve
On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Subject: [PATCH RFT] watchdog: da9063_wdt: parse DT for timeout value, too > > And make sure the final obtained value gets properly scaled. Remove two > empty lines to group the initialization blocks while we are here. > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> > --- > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD), checking the initial > timeout value via sysfs. I didn't test handover from bootloader because my > bootloader neither supports WDT or I2C out of the box. Tested on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging.git * watchdog-next 6829e6ef3f22 [origin/watchdog-next] watchdog: pnx4008: readout watchdog state Tested-by: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com> Regards, Steve
Hi Steve, On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 12:10 PM Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com> wrote: > On 15 April 2019 10:29, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT] watchdog: da9063_wdt: parse DT for timeout value, too > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 08:11:16AM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote: > > > On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD) > > > > > > Can I please check there is no mistake in your description. I have been repeatedly > > > told by the hardware engineers here, (for the past 6 years) it is not possible. > > > But, you seem to have an R-Car H2 with the AD silicon version of DA9063? > > > > I am confused, what is not possible? That I have an AD version? Yes, we > > found that out when we worked on the RTC recently. > > Sure, I know, people have been requesting continued support for DA9063 AD silicon > for years. The original DA9063 Linux driver was sent to LKML with AD support. > > > It is an early version of the Lager development board. I have no numbers > > but my assumption is there are not too many out there. > > Thanks, yes, there is interest from the hardware engineers here. Thanks for the > confirmation about your board. I will inform them about the DA9063 AD silicon on > the Renesas Lager board -- and I will let you know their response. For the record, I see the following DA9063 variants on the Renesas boards I have access to: - DA9063 AD: Lager (R-Car H2), Koelsch (R-Car M2-W), - DA9063 BB: Gose (R-Car M2-N), Blanche (R-Car V2H), Alt (R-Car E2). I cannot check Porter (R-Car M2-W) and Silk (R-Car E2) right now, but from Marek's report, Porter has DA9063L CA. Marek: which variant does your Stout (R-Car H2) have? Thanks! Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert, Thanks. On 24 April 2019 10:32, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT] watchdog: da9063_wdt: parse DT for timeout value, too > > Hi Steve, > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 12:10 PM Steve Twiss wrote: > > On 15 April 2019 10:29, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 08:11:16AM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote: > > > > On 14 April 2019 12:10, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > > > > Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD) > > > > > > > It is an early version of the Lager development board. I have no numbers > > > but my assumption is there are not too many out there. > > > > Thanks, yes, there is interest from the hardware engineers here. Thanks for the > > confirmation about your board. I will inform them about the DA9063 AD silicon on > > the Renesas Lager board -- and I will let you know their response. > > For the record, I see the following DA9063 variants on the Renesas boards I have > access to: > - DA9063 AD: Lager (R-Car H2), Koelsch (R-Car M2-W), > - DA9063 BB: Gose (R-Car M2-N), Blanche (R-Car V2H), Alt (R-Car E2). > > I cannot check Porter (R-Car M2-W) and Silk (R-Car E2) right now, but > from Marek's report, Porter has DA9063L CA. > > Marek: which variant does your Stout (R-Car H2) have? Thanks for the hardware details. I re-iterated the info from Wolfram's last e-mail to the hardware engineers during this morning's meeting. It can also be looked up on LKML if needed. I will pass on the details you have sent, next. To be clear -- I am treating these informal conversations on LKML as a data collection exercise and for them to be used as information-only. But, I pushed-back again and asked for any discussions to go through more formal channels and not to require me as a go-between, or to include the involvement of individuals like yourselves, or to use the LKML channel. This is not patch related and I don't want to request any more of anybody's time. Regards, Steve
diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c index 06eb9070203c..3d65e92a4e3f 100644 --- a/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c +++ b/drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c @@ -208,18 +208,20 @@ static int da9063_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) wdd->min_timeout = DA9063_WDT_MIN_TIMEOUT; wdd->max_timeout = DA9063_WDT_MAX_TIMEOUT; wdd->min_hw_heartbeat_ms = DA9063_RESET_PROTECTION_MS; - wdd->timeout = DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT; wdd->parent = dev; - wdd->status = WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT_INIT_STATUS; watchdog_set_restart_priority(wdd, 128); - watchdog_set_drvdata(wdd, da9063); + /* Set default timeout, maybe override it with DT value, scale it */ + wdd->timeout = DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT; + watchdog_init_timeout(wdd, 0, dev); + da9063_wdt_set_timeout(wdd, wdd->timeout); + /* Change the timeout to the default value if the watchdog is running */ if (da9063_wdt_is_running(da9063)) { - da9063_wdt_update_timeout(da9063, DA9063_WDG_TIMEOUT); + da9063_wdt_update_timeout(da9063, wdd->timeout); set_bit(WDOG_HW_RUNNING, &wdd->status); }
And make sure the final obtained value gets properly scaled. Remove two empty lines to group the initialization blocks while we are here. Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> --- Tested with a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2, DA9063AD), checking the initial timeout value via sysfs. I didn't test handover from bootloader because my bootloader neither supports WDT or I2C out of the box. drivers/watchdog/da9063_wdt.c | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)