From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933743AbcBCR1i (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:27:38 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:33604 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933523AbcBCR1g (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:27:36 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/5] Watchdog: ARM SBSA Generic Watchdog half timeout panic support To: fu.wei@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, wim@iguana.be, linux@roeck-us.net, corbet@lwn.net, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, rruigrok@codeaurora.org, harba@codeaurora.org, cov@codeaurora.org, dyoung@redhat.com, panand@redhat.com, graeme.gregory@linaro.org, al.stone@linaro.org, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, jcm@redhat.com, arnd@arndb.de, leo.duran@amd.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com References: <1454519923-25230-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <1454519923-25230-6-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> From: Timur Tabi Message-ID: <56B23883.7000501@codeaurora.org> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:27:31 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1454519923-25230-6-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_SBSA_WATCHDOG_PANIC > +static bool panic_enabled = true; I think this should default to 'false', because IMHO, this seems like an odd feature. I'm not crazy about the fact that there's a Kconfig option for it either, but I'm not going to NACK this patch. I personally would prefer to drop this patch, and just wait for full-blown pre-timeout support. It feels like a debugging feature that doesn't really belong upstream. But like I said, it's just my opinion, and I won't complain if I'm outvoted.