On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 06:38:43AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 2/4/19 4:49 AM, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > Initial support for watchdog block included in ROHM BD70528
> > power management IC.
> >
> > Configurations for low power states are still to be checked.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaitti...@fi.rohmeurope.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/watchdog/Kconfig | 12 +++
> > drivers/watchdog/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/watchdog/bd70528_wdt.c | 187
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 200 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/watchdog/bd70528_wdt.c
> >
> > +
> > +struct wdtbd70528 {
> > + struct device *dev;
> > + struct regmap *regmap;
> > + struct mutex *rtc_lock;
> > + struct watchdog_device wdt;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set_locked(struct wdtbd70528 *w, int enable)
> > +{
> > + struct bd70528 *bd70528;
> > +
> > + bd70528 = container_of(w->rtc_lock, struct bd70528, rtc_timer_lock);
> > + return bd70528->wdt_set(bd70528, enable, NULL);
> > +}
>
> Please add an empty line here.
Ok.
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set(struct wdtbd70528 *w, int enable)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(w->rtc_lock);
> > + ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, enable);
> > + mutex_unlock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_start(struct watchdog_device *wdt)
> > +{
> > + struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > + dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT ping...\n");
> > + return bd70528_wdt_set(w, 1);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_stop(struct watchdog_device *wdt)
> > +{
> > + struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > + dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT stopping...\n");
> > + return bd70528_wdt_set(w, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int bd70528_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdt,
> > + unsigned int timeout)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int hours;
> > + unsigned int minutes;
> > + unsigned int seconds;
> > + int ret;
> > + struct wdtbd70528 *w = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdt);
> > +
> > + seconds = timeout;
> > + hours = timeout / (60 * 60);
> > + /* Maximum timeout is 1h 59m 59s => hours is 1 or 0 */
> > + if (hours)
> > + seconds -= (60 * 60);
> > + minutes = seconds / 60;
> > + seconds = seconds % 60;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > + ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, 0);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto out_unlock;
> > +
> > + ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_HOUR,
> > + BD70528_MASK_WDT_HOUR, hours);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT hours\n");
> > + goto out_en_unlock;
> > + }
> > + ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_MINUTE,
> > + BD70528_MASK_WDT_MINUTE, bin2bcd(minutes));
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT minutes\n");
> > + goto out_en_unlock;
> > + }
> > + ret = regmap_update_bits(w->regmap, BD70528_REG_WDT_SEC,
> > + BD70528_MASK_WDT_SEC, bin2bcd(seconds));
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_err(w->dev, "Failed to set WDT seconds\n");
> > + else
> > + dev_dbg(w->dev, "WDT tmo set to %u\n", timeout);
> > +
> > +out_en_unlock:
> > + ret = bd70528_wdt_set_locked(w, 1);
> > +out_unlock:
> > + mutex_unlock(w->rtc_lock);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct watchdog_info bd70528_wdt_info = {
> > + .identity = "bd70528-wdt",
> > + .options = WDIOF_SETTIMEOUT | WDIOF_KEEPALIVEPING | WDIOF_MAGICCLOSE,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct watchdog_ops bd70528_wdt_ops = {
> > + .start = bd70528_wdt_start,
> > + .stop = bd70528_wdt_stop,
> > + .set_timeout = bd70528_wdt_set_timeout,
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* Max time we can set is 1 hour, 59 minutes and 59 seconds */
> > +#define WDT_MAX_MS ((2 * 60 * 60 - 1) * 1000)
> > +/* Minimum time is 1 second */
> > +#define WDT_MIN_MS 1000
> > +#define DEFAULT_TIMEOUT 60
> > +
>
> Please move to top, and tab-align the values.
Ok.
> Otherwise I am ok with the patch.
>
> On a side note, isn't it past time to drop the RFC ?
Well, the two main things for me to send this as RFC were the
regmap-irq change (which I had already discussed with Mark, and which is
now applied already - so that's Ok) and splitting the existing
include/linux/mfd/rohm-bd718x7.h header (patches 1 - 3). I hoped to get
commnts from Lee, Stephen and Mark for the idea of header split (this
impacts to already submitted bd718x7 driver and I was unsure if this good
or bad approach) but I haven't heard of Lee or Stephen yet.
Still, I have now received acks for dt-bindings, regulators, gpio and
now also for wdt - and I don't think these are heavily impacted even if
the header split was not Ok - so I guess dropping the RFC makes sense.
Thanks for pointing that out.
I'll send v6 with changes you suggested here and drop the RFC.
Br,
Matti Vaittinen
--
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND
~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then, he vanished ~~~
