2015-06-05 12:41:47

by Markus Rinne

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] watchdog: imx2_wdt: Fix ioctl() results

WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT and WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT returned the initial timeout and
not the one that was last set. Fix this by updating struct
watchdog_device member 'timeout'. This is how it's supposed to be done
according to Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-kernel-api.txt.

This is the test case I used:

#include <fcntl.h>
#include <linux/watchdog.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>

#include <assert.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

static const int TIMEOUT = 127;

int main(void)
{
int fd = open("/dev/watchdog", O_WRONLY);
if (fd == -1)
return EXIT_FAILURE;

int timeout = TIMEOUT;
ioctl(fd, WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT, &timeout);
assert(timeout == TIMEOUT);

close(fd);

return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

Signed-off-by: Markus Rinne <[email protected]>
---
drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
index 5e6d808..b636799 100644
--- a/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
+++ b/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
@@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ static int imx2_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdog,

regmap_update_bits(wdev->regmap, IMX2_WDT_WCR, IMX2_WDT_WCR_WT,
WDOG_SEC_TO_COUNT(new_timeout));
+ wdog->timeout = new_timeout;
return 0;
}

--
1.8.4


2015-06-05 13:14:39

by Guenter Roeck

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: imx2_wdt: Fix ioctl() results

On 06/05/2015 05:41 AM, Markus Rinne wrote:
> WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT and WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT returned the initial timeout and
> not the one that was last set. Fix this by updating struct
> watchdog_device member 'timeout'. This is how it's supposed to be done
> according to Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-kernel-api.txt.
>
> This is the test case I used:
>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <linux/watchdog.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
>
> #include <assert.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
>
> static const int TIMEOUT = 127;
>
> int main(void)
> {
> int fd = open("/dev/watchdog", O_WRONLY);
> if (fd == -1)
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>
> int timeout = TIMEOUT;
> ioctl(fd, WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT, &timeout);
> assert(timeout == TIMEOUT);
>
> close(fd);
>
> return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Rinne <[email protected]>
> ---

Good catch.

Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>

2015-06-05 14:14:11

by Vladimir Zapolskiy

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: imx2_wdt: Fix ioctl() results

Hello Markus,

On 05.06.2015 15:41, Markus Rinne wrote:
> WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT and WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT returned the initial timeout and
> not the one that was last set. Fix this by updating struct
> watchdog_device member 'timeout'. This is how it's supposed to be done
> according to Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-kernel-api.txt.
>
> This is the test case I used:
>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <linux/watchdog.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
>
> #include <assert.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
>
> static const int TIMEOUT = 127;
>
> int main(void)
> {
> int fd = open("/dev/watchdog", O_WRONLY);
> if (fd == -1)
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>
> int timeout = TIMEOUT;
> ioctl(fd, WDIOC_SETTIMEOUT, &timeout);
> assert(timeout == TIMEOUT);
>
> close(fd);
>
> return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Rinne <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
> index 5e6d808..b636799 100644
> --- a/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c
> @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ static int imx2_wdt_set_timeout(struct watchdog_device *wdog,
>
> regmap_update_bits(wdev->regmap, IMX2_WDT_WCR, IMX2_WDT_WCR_WT,
> WDOG_SEC_TO_COUNT(new_timeout));
> + wdog->timeout = new_timeout;
> return 0;
> }
>
>

this change repeats the change sent by Michael Grzeschik one month ago
-- http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-watchdog/msg06296.html

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

2015-06-05 14:38:16

by Guenter Roeck

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: imx2_wdt: Fix ioctl() results

On 06/05/2015 07:14 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> Hello Markus,
>
[ ... ]
>
> this change repeats the change sent by Michael Grzeschik one month ago
> -- http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-watchdog/msg06296.html
>

... and I even have it in my list of patches.

Thanks a lot for noticing.

Guenter