From: <Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com>
To: <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>, <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: <linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
<robh+dt@kernel.org>, <Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: introduce sam9x60 watchdog timer driver
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 14:17:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f07d299f-574b-8f48-9412-c9a9b50ccd3a@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191007131348.GH4254@piout.net>
On 07.10.2019 16:14, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
>
> On 07/10/2019 05:36:38-0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 10/7/19 12:58 AM, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>>> Hello Guenter,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the feedback.
>>> After reviewing this, can you please guide me towards one of the
>>> possible two directions: merge this driver with sama5d4_wdt , and have a
>>> single driver with support for both hardware blocks; or, have this
>>> driver separately , as in this patch series?
>>>
>>
>> I noticed the similarities. I don't know if it makes sense to reconcile
>> the two drivers; it seems to me the new chip uses the same basic core with
>> enhancements. In general, I prefer a single driver, but only if the result
>> doesn't end up being an if/else mess. Ultimately, it is really your call
>> to make.
>>
>
> Most if not all your comments were already addressed in the other
> driver. The main difference in the register interface is the location of
> the counter that only really affects sama5d4_wdt_set_timeout and that
> could be abstracted away by using a different struct watchdog_ops.
> Interrupt enabling is also done differently, I don't think it has a huge
> impact.
>
Thank you Guenter and Alexandre,
I will start working on a v2 with a merged driver.
Thanks again,
Eugen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-07 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-02 7:35 [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: add bindings Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 7:35 ` [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: introduce sam9x60 watchdog timer driver Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 10:23 ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-02 11:07 ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 13:16 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-07 7:58 ` Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-07 12:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2019-10-07 13:14 ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-07 14:17 ` Eugen.Hristev [this message]
2019-10-02 13:38 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-02 7:35 ` [PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINERS: add sam9x60_wdt Eugen.Hristev
2019-10-02 9:56 ` [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: sam9x60_wdt: add bindings Alexandre Belloni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f07d299f-574b-8f48-9412-c9a9b50ccd3a@microchip.com \
--to=eugen.hristev@microchip.com \
--cc=Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=wim@linux-watchdog.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).