From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400E3C43603 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 18:19:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18809214AF for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 18:19:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Wtm9D6o+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730135AbfLLSTF (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:19:05 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f193.google.com ([209.85.215.193]:45320 "EHLO mail-pg1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730034AbfLLSTF (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:19:05 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f193.google.com with SMTP id b9so1548026pgk.12; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:19:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=rgR8f1oUjZUBATiXVQBzGKim6OO45u2oQD6/qlDZ5vY=; b=Wtm9D6o+Rw8Z/2kp4hHqYDHWqiMHjwhwJqZhBTWYSHV2QpyziCmhpYw+iNK0EgzI3H zGleLoIAO28mM3cOv19mKVDWUK61FVVwzzD3+6kbxOz+BfeHEKNahCUGnzcKrhOEXE+2 aB/nCzugj9ZsvFyd+DPg/5v0DWreTLMC4vnEjGuYeg6Qyq3FlQrMI9sYVRBvRaVuWBDc e7sWjrPaysRzCNwpT/Y3OlICwSLUIgfRSM0eBOzYeA9WtZE3B87GJQT/f5eRnyPcTcYU Ig0qqPA6T1itDrUh/ZAm6nxFSZ3FSEXMYYWNjaTehaci/dCW3SrZZeqUJpfOQcp9jGgA SXLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=rgR8f1oUjZUBATiXVQBzGKim6OO45u2oQD6/qlDZ5vY=; b=boczkkHJLJ8eypLPeFv6fT8IUU/RFnDjb8f3KQH+dQkFwOc6hdRDlbREiYufvZUGFm Uc5k0syikhLMU4p/3vY0pWVaKIoDwP1ko30IuODX7qLOGlKx6Fgkjc9HxkTaidZ7Dkb1 0CkoFCmu/ZKajrEobfkAcq2embesjRHEJRKwEaCUJ7BLLLnd5lrYJTaxbbVUf9j5/HQA +KwvhezNPPWgn8IxnneW/yzt9l1UvmsM8k5Jf/2L+zJlFF/TZu7iM98hMokj1+mm7WXp A/9RbzdLraEO8iVpQVSWWgA2NasRV4EGTrDYzzSEYFHcylY8uAbxLBrVt8VD2Pz1HYam /Rzw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUaxv9vH+YGNjoC+2RyCpmjaCCnwa58RXiNe8cEiKMSkwrB4GkJ JVufobTpzPmI2R5X/COcLpygKr80 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxQtpo2SEZbeVIFNPFPIA35uoCJcj9XN/Bo4jPUjDncYiMyW5uqrgD6u/nV/eD4veoZsq1Ccg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:fd10:: with SMTP id d16mr11817204pgh.177.1576174744975; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:19:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d14sm6702804pjz.12.2019.12.12.10.19.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:19:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:19:02 -0800 From: Guenter Roeck To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Wim Van Sebroeck , open list , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Paul Burton , Denis Efremov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: mtx-1: Drop au1000.h header inclusion Message-ID: <20191212181902.GA31779@roeck-us.net> References: <20191211210204.31579-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com> <20191211210204.31579-2-f.fainelli@gmail.com> <21b7be75-db61-3b14-c57c-04af0b78b347@roeck-us.net> <3fdc99fa-f75c-33d4-e1c4-ec8ad185e2cd@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3fdc99fa-f75c-33d4-e1c4-ec8ad185e2cd@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 07:38:29PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > On 12/11/2019 5:35 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On 12/11/19 1:02 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> Including au1000.h from the machine specific header directory prevents > >> this driver from being built on any other platforms (MIPS included). > >> Since we do not use any definitions, drop it. > >> > >> Reported-by: Denis Efremov > >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli > >> --- > >>   drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c | 2 -- > >>   1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c > >> index 25a92857b217..aeca22f7450e 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c > >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/mtx-1_wdt.c > >> @@ -41,8 +41,6 @@ > >>   #include > >>   #include > >>   -#include > >> - > >>   #define MTX1_WDT_INTERVAL    (5 * HZ) > >>     static int ticks = 100 * HZ; > >> > > > > Given that this is nothing but yet another gpio watchdog driver, I'd > > personally rather have it merged with gpio_wdt.c. On a higher level, > > cleaning up old-style watchdog drivers, without converting them to > > using the watchdog core, is a waste of time. > > If that makes you feel any better, I was not planning on going further > than that, and yes, removing this driver and using gpio_wdt.c would be > the way to go, this driver greatly predates gpio_wdt.c and I have since > then not had access to my MTX-1 platforms which is why this did not > happen. We can attempt a "blind conversion" without testing, but what > good would that make, not sure. > It sounds like this is a purely cosmetical change to improve test build coverage for a more or less obsolete driver. No, that doesn't make me feel better; I get way too many of those lately. Worse, some of those test build "improvements" actually end up breaking real builds, which then costs me and others even more time to track down. We should really discourage that. Is there some challenge going on somewhere, along the line of "improve test build coverage" ? Guenter > > > > Wim, should we make it a policy to reject patches into old-style drivers > > unless they fix a real bug ? It is getting a pain to have to review those > > patches. > > > > Thanks, > > Guenter > > -- > Florian