Received: by 2002:a25:ab43:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u61csp3605316ybi; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:13:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyT2/R3CrUf4yuzaxEqcIGzITFk8T6kwiVHv+FceB6Kheftftzn0Z4I0jFhJnWMdS2Z2a06 X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:db08:: with SMTP id g8mr22302368pjv.39.1560197615836; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:13:35 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1560197615; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=usJR9u2D+N5aWTRzGAu2lUW11mHU3+V309pG2sucFB/fOx8M+Fqo4PmgHjmt7QJfXU 1u4wEU6tq0Xci0CtKrUcoXuBuUfTYzI5dF7at5gEqfhzpSebU9gbIcRwLE21yJzg8HhK b3rVyXdRdxhwM+vGpyY8CpC5jctCQKqhQgJOcrLD6QjWObrOYoESx/FElX52coNqpLVi rAYsQFnaRr769vYyebmCINmgicF4kkA9q9aS5aj8l7eo0M8WqjVTYAvJIxu8RedyI9dV EidAxmyrhy7euaC/mWKf4YjawkjzfzS86oZbdqBnMtUWQVEjnMC5zuc1dtKmZswF9rSq bliw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=E5HJ/qTvi/EwNTexoGBfWs6CI5JxRfR38m9On6Qkg3Y=; b=dOO3qtv7oPy12MEPjk16wkFw6axkavx2NlJdflwmW+8QDjG9IOz/lI+Vd595pIl97q evpo1aB5BlOGTB/PkafhIeTvHCURL9NHTYUJs4WC40Iqz1kQzF4vDHpFeqxQ0UqZ3Cf9 7lVxHPh9Gx89AstNhd14jI0QS6YKcHFq7N8OCmLjP3oGZfVSZhwx42VjWASeS4HOerZ+ fOFYxj83ueVmTxdPpqF0MT0+opLRZ8qVbJ88SGzXnLo+mHn0tf5lG+6+xV8TBuf7FJkS JhqdWtlLZerbwy/9moNuAEgPkYEAjtEMwBIOwEldVdXfFKxoUBMWRdJX+L4eo1hbWgWR mCJA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l8si263673pjq.56.2019.06.10.13.13.20; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389342AbfFJUNJ (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 16:13:09 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:49301 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389099AbfFJUNJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 16:13:09 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 37.205.120.66 Received: from localhost (unknown [37.205.120.66]) (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B7A6E000B; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:13:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 22:13:01 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Ken Sloat , "Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com" , "wim@iguana.be" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFE]: watchdog: atmel: atmel-sama5d4-wdt Message-ID: <20190610201301.GH25472@piout.net> References: <20190610162811.GA11270@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190610162811.GA11270@roeck-us.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On 10/06/2019 09:28:11-0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 03:51:52PM +0000, Ken Sloat wrote: > > Hello Nicolas, > > > > I wanted to open a discussion proposing new functionality to allow disabling of the watchdog timer upon entering > > suspend in the SAMA5D2/4. > > > > Typical use case of a hardware watchdog timer in the kernel is a userspace application opens the watchdog timer and > > periodically "kicks" it. If the application hits a deadlock somewhere and is no longer able to kick it, then the watchdog > > intervenes and often resets the processor. Such is the case for the Atmel driver (which also allows a watchdog interrupt > > to be asserted in lieu of a system reset). In most use cases, upon entering a low power/suspend state, the application > > will no longer be able to "kick" the watchdog. If the watchdog is not disabled or kicked via another method, then it will > > reset the system. This is the current behavior of the Atmel driver as of today. > > > > The watchdog peripheral itself does have a "WDIDLEHLT" bit however, and this is enabled via the "atmel,idle-halt" dt > > property. However, this is not very useful, as it literally only makes the watchdog count when the CPU is active. This > > results in non-deterministic triggering of the WDT and means that if a critical application were to crash, it may be > > quite a long time before the WDT would ever trigger. Below is a similar statement made in the device-tree doc for this > > peripheral: > > > > - atmel,idle-halt: present if you want to stop the watchdog when the CPU is > > in idle state. > > CAUTION: This property should be used with care, it actually makes the > > watchdog not counting when the CPU is in idle state, therefore the > > watchdog reset time depends on mean CPU usage and will not reset at all > > if the CPU stop working while it is in idle state, which is probably > > not what you want. > > > > It seems to me, that it would be logical and useful to introduce a new property that would cause the Atmel WDT > > to disable on suspend and re-enable on resume. It also appears that the WDT is re-initialized anyways upon > > resume, so the only piece missing here would really be a dt flag and a call to disable. > > > Wondering - why would this need a dt property ? That would be quite unusual. Is > there a condition where one would _not_ want the watchdog to stop on suspend ? > There are customers that protects suspend/resume using the watchdog. They wake up their platform every 15s to ping the watchdog. Also, I don't see why the application deciding to go to suspend wouldn't be able to disable the watchdog before do so if this is the wanted policy. > If anything I would suggest to drop atmel,idle-halt completely; it really looks > like it would make the watchdog unreliable. > > Thanks, > Guenter -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com