Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Move update_no_reboot_bit() out of atomic context

2017-08-14 Thread sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
Hi, On 08/14/2017 10:49 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:08:44AM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppusw...@linux.intel.com wrote: From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan In iTCO_wdt_start() and iTCO_wdt_stop() functions, update_no_reboot_bit() call has been made within io_lock spin lock

Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Move update_no_reboot_bit() out of atomic context

2017-08-14 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:08:44AM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppusw...@linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan > > In iTCO_wdt_start() and iTCO_wdt_stop() functions, update_no_reboot_bit() > call has been made within io_lock spin lock context. But if the > update_no_reboot_bit()

[PATCH v1 1/1] watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Move update_no_reboot_bit() out of atomic context

2017-07-27 Thread sathyanarayanan . kuppuswamy
From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan In iTCO_wdt_start() and iTCO_wdt_stop() functions, update_no_reboot_bit() call has been made within io_lock spin lock context. But if the update_no_reboot_bit() function is implemented by chipset/PMC driver then we can't be sure whether their implementation does n