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 is
> beyond me, they're conceptually unrelated.
Agreed again - periodic timers have nothing to do with watchdogs. This is
where I am confused about why you are saying that the only event a watchdog
can have is a hard reset.
> Please read my original mail on the subject.
I did. Twice - but maybe I am still missing something. (sorry)
> I'm not advocating hiding a
> clocksource somewhere in the depths of CONFIG_WATCHDOG, they're
> completely unrelated.
I (and many others) consider a "watchdog" a clock sink - something that needs
to be poked within certain limits (too fast can indicate a failures just as
too slow is a failure).
The event or how something is notified of the failure of the watchdog to be
serviced shouldn't determine what the name is.
What's in a name? that which we call a watchdog
By any other name would smell as sweet;
-Bill S
-Robin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
