Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:45:03 -0400
To: Stefan Roese <stefan.roese@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bootup support for watchdog with short timeout (touch_nmi_watchdog()?)
Message-ID: <20071029194503.GB27646@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <200710291522.27311.stefan.roese@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200710291522.27311.stefan.roese@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1189
Lines: 26

On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 03:22:27PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> I'm trying to implement support for a board specific watchdog on a PPC440EPx 
> board with a very short timeout. In this case, the watchdog has to 
> be "kicked" at least every 100ms, even while booting and the real watchdog 
> driver not running yet. While looking for trigger places in the kernel 
> source, I noticed the already existing "touch_nmi_watchdog()" function, which 
> seems to be doing what I need. Even if the name not exactly matches my 
> hardware setup.
> 
> My question now is, is it recommended to use this 
> touch_nmi_watchdog() "infrastructure" for my PPC custom specific watchdog 
> during bootup? And if yes, should it perhaps be renamed to a more generic 
> name, like "touch_watchdog"?
> 
> Please advise. Thanks.

No idea really.  Who would design a watchdog with such a short trigger
time?  That doesn't seem to be useful in any way.

--
Len Sorensen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/