On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:02:08AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Maxime, All,
>
> > > 1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
> > > thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
> >
> > It would have been great for you to mention it then.
> >
> > > 2) You never
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:02:08AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Maxime, All,
>
> > > 1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
> > > thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
> >
> > It would have been great for you to mention it then.
> >
> > > 2) You never
Maxime, All,
> > 1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
> > thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
>
> It would have been great for you to mention it then.
>
> > 2) You never mentioned you needed this in for 3.16 and that things
> > would break because of it.
>
Maxime, All,
1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
It would have been great for you to mention it then.
2) You never mentioned you needed this in for 3.16 and that things
would break because of it.
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:02:08AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Maxime, All,
1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
It would have been great for you to mention it then.
2) You never mentioned you needed
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:02:08AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Maxime, All,
1) For me the discussion was not ended and needs further
thinking. (And I just read some good ideas about it).
It would have been great for you to mention it then.
2) You never mentioned you needed
On 06/24/2014 07:49 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Hi Maxime,
Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
directly during the merge
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
>
> > > > Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
> > > > you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
> > > > directly during the merge window?
> > > >
> > > I
On Monday 23 June 2014 14:47:48 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > To continue the discussion: I would like to add an excerpt from
> > drivers/watchdog/alim7101_wdt.c
> > /*
> > * Notifier for system down
> > */
> >
> > static int wdt_notify_sys(struct notifier_block *this,
> >
On Monday 23 June 2014 14:47:48 Guenter Roeck wrote:
To continue the discussion: I would like to add an excerpt from
drivers/watchdog/alim7101_wdt.c
/*
* Notifier for system down
*/
static int wdt_notify_sys(struct notifier_block *this,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Hi Maxime,
Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
directly during the merge window?
I had prepared a pull
On 06/24/2014 07:49 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:13:24PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Hi Maxime,
Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
directly during the merge
On 06/23/2014 02:30 PM, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Hi All,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
not in linux-next, they are
Hi All,
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >>The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
> > >>both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
> > >>not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark
Hi Alan,
> On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
> Maxime Ripard wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > On Tue,
Hi Maxime,
> > > Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
> > > you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
> > > directly during the merge window?
> > >
> > I had prepared a pull request for Wim last weekend or so, but then there
> > were
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
> >>both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
> >>not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark either.
> >
> >So,
On 06/23/2014 08:35 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
Moved to where?
I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function
On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Moved to where?
> >
> > I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
> > intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
> >
>
> I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function pointer from a watchdog
>
On 06/23/2014 07:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 23 June 2014 07:30:56 Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at
On Monday 23 June 2014 07:30:56 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard
On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at
On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard
On Monday 23 June 2014 07:30:56 Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On 06/23/2014 07:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 23 June 2014 07:30:56 Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 06/23/2014 03:31 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at
On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
Moved to where?
I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function pointer from a watchdog
driver doesn't
On 06/23/2014 08:35 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
Moved to where?
I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark either.
So, this patch
Hi Maxime,
Guenter, since you seem to be the only responsive, may I suggest that
you start merging patches and do a pull request to either Wim or Linus
directly during the merge window?
I had prepared a pull request for Wim last weekend or so, but then there
were more patches
Hi Alan,
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
Maxime Ripard maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck
Hi All,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
not in linux-next, they are not completely in the dark either.
So,
On 06/23/2014 02:30 PM, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
Hi All,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:30:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The patches _are_ in my watchdog-next branch and get some coverage from
both my auto-builders and from Fenguang's build robots, so while they are
not in linux-next, they are
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 09:39:43PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
> Maxime Ripard wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 07, 2014
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > Most of the watchdog code
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Most of the watchdog code is
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
Maxime Ripard maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue,
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 09:39:43PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:34:44 +0200
Maxime Ripard maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:34:44PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code
> > > and
> > > the
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:11:23AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code
and
the watchdog
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code and
> > the watchdog driver. Add the restart hook to the watchdog driver, to be
> > able to
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:33:18PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code and
the watchdog driver. Add the restart hook to the watchdog driver, to be
able to
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code and
> the watchdog driver. Add the restart hook to the watchdog driver, to be able
> to
> remove it from the machine code eventually.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:44:19PM -0500, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Most of the watchdog code is duplicated between the machine restart code and
the watchdog driver. Add the restart hook to the watchdog driver, to be able
to
remove it from the machine code eventually.
Signed-off-by: Maxime
50 matches
Mail list logo
