> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SOFT_WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT)
> >  static void softdog_pretimeout(unsigned long data)
> 
> I would prefer __maybe_unused here ..
> 
> >  {
> >     watchdog_notify_pretimeout(&softdog_dev);
> > @@ -82,16 +83,23 @@ static void softdog_pretimeout(unsigned long data)
> >  static struct timer_list softdog_preticktock =
> >             TIMER_INITIALIZER(softdog_pretimeout, 0, 0);
> >  
> > +static struct timer_list *softdog_preticktock_ptr = &softdog_preticktock;
> > +#else
> > +static void *softdog_preticktock_ptr = NULL;
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_SOFT_WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT */
> > +
> >  static int softdog_ping(struct watchdog_device *w)
> >  {
> >     if (!mod_timer(&softdog_ticktock, jiffies + (w->timeout * HZ)))
> >             __module_get(THIS_MODULE);
> >  
> > -   if (w->pretimeout)
> > -           mod_timer(&softdog_preticktock, jiffies +
> > -                     (w->timeout - w->pretimeout) * HZ);
> > -   else
> > -           del_timer(&softdog_preticktock);
> > +   if (softdog_preticktock_ptr) {
> 
> and "if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SOFT_WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT))" here.
> 
> > +           if (w->pretimeout)
> > +                   mod_timer(softdog_preticktock_ptr, jiffies +
> > +                             (w->timeout - w->pretimeout) * HZ);
> > +           else
> > +                   del_timer(softdog_preticktock_ptr);
> > +   }
> >  
> >     return 0;
> >  }
> > @@ -101,15 +109,15 @@ static int softdog_stop(struct watchdog_device *w)
> >     if (del_timer(&softdog_ticktock))
> >             module_put(THIS_MODULE);
> >  
> > -   del_timer(&softdog_preticktock);
> > +   if (softdog_preticktock_ptr)
> 
> Is this conditional needed (assuming we get rid of softdog_preticktock_ptr) ?
> Ok though if you want to use it to drop the code if not needed.

Yes. I tried a few variations and this is the outcome which I liked
best, because it is quite readable, keeps all the extra stuff within one
block and has 0 size penalty when the feature is not enabled.

I'd like to keep it this way unless you have a strong opinion.

Reply via email to