From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751916AbbFAHuP (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jun 2015 03:50:15 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]:33632 "EHLO mail-ob0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751201AbbFAHuK (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jun 2015 03:50:10 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5568E3E8.7070008@roeck-us.net> References: <=fu.wei@linaro.org> <1432548193-19569-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <1432548193-19569-6-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <5564A44A.5000606@codeaurora.org> <55686960.5010503@codeaurora.org> <556889D9.5070707@codeaurora.org> <5568E3E8.7070008@roeck-us.net> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 15:50:09 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver From: Fu Wei To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Timur Tabi , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Linaro ACPI Mailman List , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Wei Fu , G Gregory , Al Stone , Hanjun Guo , Ashwin Chaugule , Arnd Bergmann , vgandhi@codeaurora.org, wim@iguana.be, Jon Masters , Leo Duran , Jon Corbet , Mark Rutland , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Guenter , Timur On 30 May 2015 at 06:10, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 05/29/2015 08:46 AM, Timur Tabi wrote: >> >> On 05/29/2015 09:32 AM, Fu Wei wrote: >>> >>> It is a SPI, every CPU can get it, >>> But maybe I miss something, but please let me know if other CPU can >>> not get the interrupt. >> >> >> There's only one watchdog device, so there's only one interrupt. I don't >> know which CPU will get the interrupt, but the watchdog is not a per-CPU >> device. >> > Plus, that one interrupt is not shared, and the driver returns > IRQ_HANDLED even if the bit is not set. So _something_ is definitely > wrong. Either the interrupt is shared, then it needs to be requested > as shared and the handler should only return IRQ_HANDLED if it actually > handles the interrupt. Or it is not shared and the handler should always > handle it. I have thought about this again, For now, I did not find any reason to keep that "if (status & SBSA_GWDT_WCS_WS0)" So you are right, I should delete it. and for IRQF_TIMER, I will delete it. Thanks for your correction. > > Guenter > -- Best regards, Fu Wei Software Engineer Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct) Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile) Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15, One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District, Shanghai,China 200021