Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-03 Thread Fabio Porcedda
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD plagn...@jcrosoft.com wrote: On 17:04 Tue 02 Oct , Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:54:55PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-03 Thread Fabio Porcedda
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: I was thinking to add a more generic helper function like this: static inline void watchdog_get_dttimeout(struct device_node *node, u32 *timeout) { if (node) of_property_read_u32(node, timeout,

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-03 Thread Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
On 18:32 Wed 03 Oct , Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD plagn...@jcrosoft.com wrote: On 17:04 Tue 02 Oct , Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-02 Thread Fabio Porcedda
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:54:55PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01,

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-02 Thread Andrew Lunn
I was thinking to add a more generic helper function like this: static inline void watchdog_get_dttimeout(struct device_node *node, u32 *timeout) { if (node) of_property_read_u32(node, timeout, wdd-timeout); } You forgot to change the function signature. Also, if

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-02 Thread Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
On 17:04 Tue 02 Oct , Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:54:55PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45

[PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-01 Thread Fabio Porcedda
Tested on an at91sam9260 board (evk-pro3) Signed-off-by: Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com --- .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt | 19 +++ drivers/watchdog/at91sam9_wdt.c | 21 + 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+)

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-01 Thread Fabio Porcedda
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: Tested on an at91sam9260 board (evk-pro3) Signed-off-by: Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com --- .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/atmel-wdt.txt | 19

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-01 Thread Fabio Porcedda
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: Tested on an at91sam9260 board (evk-pro3) Signed-off-by: Fabio Porcedda

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-01 Thread Andrew Lunn
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: Tested on an at91sam9260 board (evk-pro3) Signed-off-by: Fabio Porcedda

Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] watchdog: at91sam9_wdt: add device tree support

2012-10-01 Thread Andrew Lunn
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:54:55PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Fabio Porcedda fabio.porce...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch wrote: On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Fabio Porcedda wrote: Tested on an