Hi Linus,
I'm reviewing the different watchdog drivers and started porting the features
that have been added in the 2.4 kernel to the 2.5 development kernel.
I now wondered if it would make sence to put all watchdog drivers in
drivers/char/watchdog/ instead of in drivers/char ?
Please comments.
Greetings,
Wim.
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 07:40:41PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> I'm reviewing the different watchdog drivers and started porting the features
> that have been added in the 2.4 kernel to the 2.5 development kernel.
> I now wondered if it would make sence to put all watchdog drivers in
> drivers/char/watchdog/ instead of in drivers/char ?
> Please comments.
Rob Radez has been doing a lot of work in this area; I thought he
was going to do the 2.5 drivers as well (or his last mail on the
8 August seemed to imply that.) Not sure what happened.
Rob?
--
Russell King ([email protected]) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Russell King wrote:
| On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 07:40:41PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
| > I'm reviewing the different watchdog drivers and started porting the features
| > that have been added in the 2.4 kernel to the 2.5 development kernel.
| > I now wondered if it would make sence to put all watchdog drivers in
| > drivers/char/watchdog/ instead of in drivers/char ?
| > Please comments.
|
| Rob Radez has been doing a lot of work in this area; I thought he
| was going to do the 2.5 drivers as well (or his last mail on the
| 8 August seemed to imply that.) Not sure what happened.
|
| Rob?
Rob has gone off to school and apparently has little time
for such trivial stuff. :)
His (2.4.19-preN) patches used to live at http://junker.org/~rradez/wd/
but I can't get to that web server now.
I do have a copy of the patch file that was there if Wim
or anyone needs/wants it.
--
~Randy
"In general, avoiding problems is better than solving them."
-- from "#ifdef Considered Harmful", Spencer & Collyer, USENIX 1992.
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 03:31:12PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> Rob has gone off to school and apparently has little time
> for such trivial stuff. :)
Ah.
> His (2.4.19-preN) patches used to live at http://junker.org/~rradez/wd/
> but I can't get to that web server now.
> I do have a copy of the patch file that was there if Wim
> or anyone needs/wants it.
see: http://osinvestor.com/
His latest was 2.4.20-pre1-2.diff on 26 September.
--
Russell King ([email protected]) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Russell King wrote:
| On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 03:31:12PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
| > Rob has gone off to school and apparently has little time
| > for such trivial stuff. :)
|
| Ah.
|
| > His (2.4.19-preN) patches used to live at http://junker.org/~rradez/wd/
| > but I can't get to that web server now.
| > I do have a copy of the patch file that was there if Wim
| > or anyone needs/wants it.
|
| see: http://osinvestor.com/
|
| His latest was 2.4.20-pre1-2.diff on 26 September.
Wow! That was his old web server name, then he moved
stuff to junker.org, but now it's back at osinvestor.com
and he has some time to put on it too. That's good news.
Thanks.
--
~Randy
"In general, avoiding problems is better than solving them."
-- from "#ifdef Considered Harmful", Spencer & Collyer, USENIX 1992.
I had to move my patches off of junker.org and back to http://osinvestor.com/
which also changed the timestamp on the file. I really have been meaning to
keep the patch updated (and continue working on stuff), as well as submit
stuff for 2.5, but I've just been really busy. At this point, I'd be quite
happy to let someone else submit my work for 2.5 or 2.4.
Regards,
Rob Radez
Hi Rob,
I have downloaded your latest patch and will use it to update the watchdog
drivers. I'll be doing some additional cleanup and additions myself probably.
Now I'm still left with my original question: wouldn't it be easier if we
put all watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/ ?
Greetings,
Wim.
> I had to move my patches off of junker.org and back to http://osinvestor.com/
> which also changed the timestamp on the file. I really have been meaning to
> keep the patch updated (and continue working on stuff), as well as submit
> stuff for 2.5, but I've just been really busy. At this point, I'd be quite
> happy to let someone else submit my work for 2.5 or 2.4.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Radez
Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> I'm reviewing the different watchdog drivers and started porting the features
> that have been added in the 2.4 kernel to the 2.5 development kernel.
> I now wondered if it would make sence to put all watchdog drivers in
> drivers/char/watchdog/ instead of in drivers/char ?
> Please comments.
Well I think it's a good idea, as you can easily see what
watchdogs are supported rather than referring to the (currently
out of date) docs:
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2002-02/0713.html
P?draig.
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 10:12:09AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> I have downloaded your latest patch and will use it to update the watchdog
> drivers. I'll be doing some additional cleanup and additions myself probably.
>
> Now I'm still left with my original question: wouldn't it be easier if we
> put all watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/ ?
I'd say go for it. drivers/char/ is looking quite cluttered, and this
has the added advantage of decreasing the size of the Config.in and
config.help files too.
One thing though, please do the move first, and submit that, then do the
cleanups and submit seperatly. It makes things much easier to track
whats going on.
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> > Now I'm still left with my original question: wouldn't it be easier if we
> > put all watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/ ?
>
> I'd say go for it. drivers/char/ is looking quite cluttered, and this
> has the added advantage of decreasing the size of the Config.in and
> config.help files too.
I still see two options:
1) drivers/char/watchdog/
2) drivers/watchdog/
Not sure what's best in this case...
Greetings,
Wim.
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 02:41:58PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > > Now I'm still left with my original question: wouldn't it be easier if we
> > > put all watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/ ?
> >
> > I'd say go for it. drivers/char/ is looking quite cluttered, and this
> > has the added advantage of decreasing the size of the Config.in and
> > config.help files too.
>
> I still see two options:
> 1) drivers/char/watchdog/
> 2) drivers/watchdog/
>
> Not sure what's best in this case...
They remain character devices, so drivers/char/watchdog/ gets my vote.
Any nay-sayers ?
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 02:04:41PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> They remain character devices, so drivers/char/watchdog/ gets my vote.
> Any nay-sayers ?
I'm all in favor of drivers/char/watchdog/, but when I asked way back when,
I could never get a response from anyone upstream willing to take patches.
Also, I've got patches around from Matt Domsch that did the move, and changed
around the necessary drivers/char/ files. I haven't been keeping them up-to-
date, maybe Matt has.
Regards,
Rob Radez
> Also, I've got patches around from Matt Domsch that did the
> move, and changed
> around the necessary drivers/char/ files. I haven't been
> keeping them up-to- date, maybe Matt has.
I haven't been, but it doesn't look too painful to do it. The Natsemi
SCx200 merge is what's screwing up BK's automerge of it (I hadn't updated
that tree since April...).
The move work took me a few hours last time I did it, I can resurrect that
now that there's interest. Give me a few hours, today's kind of busy...
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Domsch
Sr. Software Engineer, Lead Engineer, Architect
Dell Linux Solutions http://www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
| On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
|
| > > Now I'm still left with my original question: wouldn't it be easier if we
| > > put all watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/ ?
| >
| > I'd say go for it. drivers/char/ is looking quite cluttered, and this
| > has the added advantage of decreasing the size of the Config.in and
| > config.help files too.
|
| I still see two options:
| 1) drivers/char/watchdog/
| 2) drivers/watchdog/
|
| Not sure what's best in this case...
I agree that you should split them out.
I would expect them to be in drivers/char/watchdog .
--
~Randy
"In general, avoiding problems is better than solving them."
-- from "#ifdef Considered Harmful", Spencer & Collyer, USENIX 1992.
Hi Matt,
> > Also, I've got patches around from Matt Domsch that did the
> > move, and changed
> > around the necessary drivers/char/ files. I haven't been
> > keeping them up-to- date, maybe Matt has.
>
> I haven't been, but it doesn't look too painful to do it. The Natsemi
> SCx200 merge is what's screwing up BK's automerge of it (I hadn't updated
> that tree since April...).
>
> The move work took me a few hours last time I did it, I can resurrect that
> now that there's interest. Give me a few hours, today's kind of busy...
I just did it myself this afternoon. It's indeed not to painfull to do this.
I'll prepare some first patches tonight, so that people can start playing
with it. Second patch will be to make sure that it's all C99 designated
initializers.
Greetings,
Wim.
> > > Also, I've got patches around from Matt Domsch that did the
> > > move, and changed
> > > around the necessary drivers/char/ files. I haven't been
> > > keeping them up-to- date, maybe Matt has.
> >
> > I haven't been, but it doesn't look too painful to do it. The Natsemi
> > SCx200 merge is what's screwing up BK's automerge of it (I hadn't updated
> > that tree since April...).
> >
> > The move work took me a few hours last time I did it, I can resurrect that
> > now that there's interest. Give me a few hours, today's kind of busy...
>
> I just did it myself this afternoon. It's indeed not to painfull to do this.
> I'll prepare some first patches tonight, so that people can start playing
> with it. Second patch will be to make sure that it's all C99 designated
> initializers.
I think this does it... Builds right on x86, all the drivers that are in
the tree right now...
Please do a
bk pull http://mdomsch.bkbits.net/linux-2.5-mvwatchdog
This will update the following files:
drivers/char/acquirewdt.c | 242 ------------
drivers/char/advantechwdt.c | 270 --------------
drivers/char/eurotechwdt.c | 507 --------------------------
drivers/char/i810-tco.c | 385 --------------------
drivers/char/i810-tco.h | 45 --
drivers/char/ib700wdt.c | 301 ---------------
drivers/char/machzwd.c | 559 -----------------------------
drivers/char/mixcomwd.c | 279 --------------
drivers/char/pcwd.c | 663 -----------------------------------
drivers/char/sbc60xxwdt.c | 355 ------------------
drivers/char/scx200_wdt.c | 277 --------------
drivers/char/shwdt.c | 419 ----------------------
drivers/char/softdog.c | 197 ----------
drivers/char/w83877f_wdt.c | 342 ------------------
drivers/char/wd501p.h | 91 ----
drivers/char/wdt.c | 566 -----------------------------
drivers/char/wdt285.c | 197 ----------
drivers/char/wdt977.c | 352 ------------------
drivers/char/wdt_pci.c | 655 ----------------------------------
drivers/char/Config.help | 436 -----------------------
drivers/char/Config.in | 33 -
drivers/char/Makefile | 32 -
drivers/char/watchdog/Config.help | 220 +++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/Config.in | 36 +
drivers/char/watchdog/Makefile | 49 ++
drivers/char/watchdog/acquirewdt.c | 242 ++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/advantechwdt.c | 270 ++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/eurotechwdt.c | 507 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/i810-tco.c | 385 ++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/i810-tco.h | 45 ++
drivers/char/watchdog/ib700wdt.c | 301 +++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/machzwd.c | 559 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/mixcomwd.c | 279 ++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/pcwd.c | 663 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/sbc60xxwdt.c | 355 ++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/scx200_wdt.c | 277 ++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/shwdt.c | 419 ++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/softdog.c | 197 ++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/w83877f_wdt.c | 342 ++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/wd501p.h | 91 ++++
drivers/char/watchdog/wdt.c | 566 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/wdt285.c | 197 ++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/wdt977.c | 352 ++++++++++++++++++
drivers/char/watchdog/wdt_pci.c | 655 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
44 files changed, 7013 insertions, 7197 deletions
through these ChangeSets:
<[email protected]> (02/10/14 1.852)
watchdog: move from drivers/char to drivers/char/watchdog
<[email protected]> (02/04/12 1.373.15.2)
remove left-behind Config.help watchdog entries, change Makefile comment
<[email protected]> (02/04/12 1.373.15.1)
Move watchdog drivers to drivers/char/watchdog
Also in patch form:
http://domsch.com/linux/patches/watchdog/linux-2.5.42-mvwatchdog.patch
http://domsch.com/linux/patches/watchdog/linux-2.5.42-mvwatchdog.patch.asc
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Domsch
Sr. Software Engineer, Lead Engineer, Architect
Dell Linux Solutions http://www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Matt Domsch wrote:
>...
> This will update the following files:
>
>...
> drivers/char/Config.help | 436 -----------------------
>...
> drivers/char/watchdog/Config.help | 220 +++++++++++
>...
I was wondering where this difference came from and it seems the diffstat
output is wrong?
<-- snip -->
$ filterdiff -i *char/Config.help linux-2.5.42-mvwatchdog.patch \
> | grep ^- | grep -v ^--- | wc -l
221
$
<-- snip -->
> http://domsch.com/linux/patches/watchdog/linux-2.5.42-mvwatchdog.patch
>...
> Thanks,
> Matt
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
[email protected] said:
> They remain character devices, so drivers/char/watchdog/ gets my
> vote. Any nay-sayers ?
By that logic, we should have only drivers/{net,char,block}.
--
dwmw2
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 10:35:38AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> [email protected] said:
> > They remain character devices, so drivers/char/watchdog/ gets my
> > vote. Any nay-sayers ?
>
> By that logic, we should have only drivers/{net,char,block}.
Suits me 8-)
Though a drivers/bus/ would make sense too for things like pci, sbus,
and friends, but that kind of thing can wait until 2.7 I think 8-)
To get back to the point, drivers/ seems cluttered, and as the
objective is decluttering drivers/char/ removing a dozen files, and
replacing them with a single directory in that dir just seems better
than adding an extra dir in drivers/ to me, but then again, I could
be out of my tiny little mind.
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
> I was wondering where this difference came from and it seems
> the diffstat output is wrong?
The diffstat I sent in the email was generated by bk-make-sum, which because
it was across several changesets somehow got the math wrong. Diffstat of
the accompanying patch (generated from bk treediff of the two trees) shows:
Config.help | 222 ---------------
watchdog/Config.help | 220 +++++++++++++++
which I'd believe to be correct.
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Domsch
Sr. Software Engineer, Lead Engineer, Architect
Dell Linux Solutions http://www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com
Hi Matt,
> I think this does it... Builds right on x86, all the drivers that are in
> the tree right now...
Ok, I compared your patches againts mine and they were almost identical. :-)
After some more coding I have now a first set of patches to get everything
moved and to add the missing watchdog drivers. Next patches will contain
updates on the documentation and on each driver seperatly.
The first patches are:
Patch 1 : move of existing watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/
Patch 2 : remove of 'old' watchdog drivers in drivers/char/
Patch 3 : cleanup additional spaces in headers + addition of MODULE-info
Patch 4 : C99 designated initializers for watchdog drivers
Patch 5 : add extra watchdog drivers
If you want to test them you can get them at the following URL:
http://medelec.uia.ac.be/linux/watchdog/ .
Greetings,
Wim.
Hi Matt,
> Ok, I compared your patches againts mine and they were almost identical. :-)
> After some more coding I have now a first set of patches to get everything
> moved and to add the missing watchdog drivers. Next patches will contain
> updates on the documentation and on each driver seperatly.
>
> The first patches are:
> Patch 1 : move of existing watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/
> Patch 2 : remove of 'old' watchdog drivers in drivers/char/
> Patch 3 : cleanup additional spaces in headers + addition of MODULE-info
> Patch 4 : C99 designated initializers for watchdog drivers
> Patch 5 : add extra watchdog drivers
>
> If you want to test them you can get them at the following URL:
> http://medelec.uia.ac.be/linux/watchdog/ .
Since there seems to be a problem with web-traffic to the server, I changed
the location of the patches. They are now at:
ftp://medelec.uia.ac.be/pub/linux/kernel-patches/
Greetings,
Wim.
Hi All,
I updated the watchdog patches for v2.5.45. (To reflect the Kconfig configuration files).
Patch 1 : move of existing watchdog drivers in drivers/char/watchdog/
Patch 2 : remove of 'old' watchdog drivers in drivers/char/
Patch 3 : cleanup additional spaces in headers + addition of MODULE-info
Patch 4 : C99 designated initializers for watchdog drivers
Patch 5 : add extra watchdog drivers
Patch 6 : changes the CONFIG dependencies in wdt_pci.c (They were incorrect).
The patches are ftp-able at:
ftp://medelec.uia.ac.be/pub/linux/kernel-patches/ .
The diff files are wd-2.5.45-patch*
Greetings,
Wim.