On 5/25/07, Daniel Newby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So far the only example anyone has provided outside of periodic timers or
> hardware reset has been dumping the stack when something gets stuck.
> Softlockup does this already today, using a
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So far the only example anyone has provided outside of periodic timers or
hardware reset has been dumping the stack when something gets stuck.
Softlockup does this already today, using a timer.
Many watchdogs can be hooked up to a non-maskable
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So far the only example anyone has provided outside of periodic timers or
hardware reset has been dumping the stack when something gets stuck.
Softlockup does this already today, using a timer.
Many watchdogs can be hooked up to a non-maskable
On 5/25/07, Daniel Newby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So far the only example anyone has provided outside of periodic timers or
hardware reset has been dumping the stack when something gets stuck.
Softlockup does this already today, using a timer.
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:32:30PM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
> On Thu 24 May 2007 11:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
> >
> > Calling it a periodic timer when its in periodic timer mode makes sense.
>
> No disagreements - but I don't think that a watchdog that doesn't cause a
> reset is a periodic
On Thu 24 May 2007 11:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
>
> Calling it a periodic timer when its in periodic timer mode makes sense.
No disagreements - but I don't think that a watchdog that doesn't cause a
reset is a periodic timer.
> Why you would want to interface that with a userspace watchdog
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 09:29:51AM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
> On Thu 24 May 2007 01:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
> > > provides what i want and i just dont know
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
> provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
> make people change the driver to fit their
On 5/24/07, Daniel Newby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
> Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
> otherwise act as periodic timers, trying to push
On Thu 24 May 2007 01:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
> On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
> > provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
> > make people change the driver to fit
> is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
> provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
> make people change the driver to fit their application, thus throwing
> out the idea of keeping all board-specific details in just the boards
> file ...
There
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 03:47:45AM -0500, Daniel Newby wrote:
> On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
> >Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
> >otherwise act as periodic timers,
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
otherwise act as periodic timers, trying to push both of these
functionalities in to a watchdog driver is
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
otherwise act as periodic timers, trying to push both of these
functionalities in to a watchdog driver is
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 03:47:45AM -0500, Daniel Newby wrote:
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
otherwise act as periodic timers, trying to
is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
make people change the driver to fit their application, thus throwing
out the idea of keeping all board-specific details in just the boards
file ...
There are
On Thu 24 May 2007 01:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
make people change the driver to fit their
On 5/24/07, Daniel Newby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds like your constraining your driver based on terminology.
Watchdogs on most embedded platforms support either a 'reset' mode or
otherwise act as periodic timers, trying to push both of
On 5/24/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
make people change the driver to fit their
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 09:29:51AM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
On Thu 24 May 2007 01:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
provides what i want and i just dont know about it ?
On Thu 24 May 2007 11:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
Calling it a periodic timer when its in periodic timer mode makes sense.
No disagreements - but I don't think that a watchdog that doesn't cause a
reset is a periodic timer.
Why you would want to interface that with a userspace watchdog daemon
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:32:30PM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
On Thu 24 May 2007 11:23, Paul Mundt pondered:
Calling it a periodic timer when its in periodic timer mode makes sense.
No disagreements - but I don't think that a watchdog that doesn't cause a
reset is a periodic timer.
I'm
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
> provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
> make people change the driver to fit their application, thus throwing
> out the idea of keeping
the Blackfin on-chip watchdog has controllable behavior ... it can be
configured to reset the processor (like a normal watchdog), or it can
be configured to simply generate an interrupt.
i can see embedded systems where simply resetting the system is not
desirable ... perhaps it's the control
the Blackfin on-chip watchdog has controllable behavior ... it can be
configured to reset the processor (like a normal watchdog), or it can
be configured to simply generate an interrupt.
i can see embedded systems where simply resetting the system is not
desirable ... perhaps it's the control
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 12:21:47AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
is this completely bad mojo ? is there some other mechanism that
provides what i want and i just dont know about it ? or do i just
make people change the driver to fit their application, thus throwing
out the idea of keeping all
26 matches
Mail list logo
