Hi Ozan,

>
> > Also, what do you think about using dev_read_u32_default() with a
> > default of 3 (appropriately documented) so that any users with
> > modified or custom board device trees will not be surprised by this if
> > they update to the latest?
>
> Fair point on not surprising existing users. My only hesitation is that
> the SEC ID isn't really a value with a sensible universal default. It's
> a fixed per-SoC hardware constant. It's 3 on the current SC5xx parts, but
> on the upcoming ADSP SoC the watchdog maps to different SEC ID, for example.
>
> Defaulting to 3 keeps existing SC5xx device trees working (they all want
> 3 anyway), so it does address the custom-DT case you raise. The trade-off
> is that a future SoC whose DT omits the property would then probe
> "successfully" while programming the wrong SEC source and silently
> breaking the watchdog->reset path, rather than failing at probe.
>
> I'd lean slightly towards keeping it required so a misconfiguration is caught
> early. But I don't feel strongly, if you'd prefer the default for the
> custom-DT case,
> I'm okay to use dev_read_u32_default() with a comment documenting that 3 is
> the SC5xx value. Which would you prefer?
>

I think you make a good point. Keep it as is, no default value. I
would suggest adding a print statement describing the problem in that
case, so that it is easy to find the issue with a custom DT from
before this change.

Thanks,
Greg

Reply via email to