Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] watchdog: da9062: reset board on watchdog timeout

[Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com>]

On 1. 12. 21 22:26, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/1/21 12:15 AM, Andrej Picej wrote:
>> Implement a method to change watchdog timeout configuration based on DT
>> binding ("dlg,wdt-sd"). There is a possibility to change the bahaviour
>> of watchdog reset. Setting WATCHDOG_SD bit enables SHUTDOWN mode, and
>> clearing it enables POWERDOWN mode on watchdog timeout.
>>
>> If no DT binding is specified the WATCHDOG_SD bit stays in default
>> configuration, not breaking behaviour of devices which might depend on
>> default fuse configuration.
>>
>> Note: This patch requires that the config register CONFIG_I is
>> configured as writable in the da9062 multi function device.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v3:
>>   - no changes
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>   - don't force the "reset" for all da9062-watchdog users, instead add DT
>>     binding where the behavior can be selected
>> ---
>>   drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c 
>> b/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c
>> index f02cbd530538..e342e9e50cb1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c
>> @@ -85,8 +85,33 @@ static int da9062_wdt_start(struct watchdog_device 
>> *wdd)
>>   {
>>       struct da9062_watchdog *wdt = watchdog_get_drvdata(wdd);
>>       unsigned int selector;
>> +    unsigned int mask;
>> +    u32 val;
>>       int ret;
>> +    /* Configure what happens on watchdog timeout. Can be specified with
>> +     * "dlg,wdt-sd" dt-binding (0 -> POWERDOWN, 1 -> SHUTDOWN).
>> +     * If "dlg,wdt-sd" dt-binding is NOT set use the default.
>> +     */
> 
> Please use standard multi-line comments. This is not the networking
> subsystem.
> 
> Also, if you think this code should be here and not in the probe function,
> as suggested by Adam, please provide a rationale.
> 

I will fix the multi-line comment, move this code to probe and
submit the changes in the next patch version.

Thanks,
Andrej