Hi David,
On 08/05/2015 12:51 PM, David Teigland wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:01:38PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
I think I can understand why Wim was reluctant to accept your patch;
I must admit I don't understand your use case either.
Very breifly, sanlock is a shared storage based lea
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:01:38PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> I think I can understand why Wim was reluctant to accept your patch;
> I must admit I don't understand your use case either.
Very breifly, sanlock is a shared storage based lease manager, and the
expiration of a lease is tied to the
Hi David,
On 08/05/2015 10:51 AM, David Teigland wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:41:51AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Not really. The heartbeats will be generated such that the watchdog expires
no later that . I discussed
this already with Uwe; he had the same concern. This isn't in the curren
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:41:51AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Not really. The heartbeats will be generated such that the watchdog expires
> no later that . I
> discussed
> this already with Uwe; he had the same concern. This isn't in the current
> version of the patch set, but it will be in the
Hi David,
On 08/05/2015 10:13 AM, David Teigland wrote:
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 07:13:26PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
- Some watchdogs have a very short maximum timeout, in the range of just a few
seconds. Such low timeouts are difficult if not impossible to support from
user space. Driv
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 07:13:26PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> - Some watchdogs have a very short maximum timeout, in the range of just a few
> seconds. Such low timeouts are difficult if not impossible to support from
> user space. Drivers supporting such watchdog hardware need to implement
Hello Guenter,
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:50:25AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 08/05/2015 12:36 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> >the watchdog I'm currently working with on a powerpc platform has a
> >unchangable timeout of ~1 s. To make the machine boot I patched the
> >bootloader and need some
Hi Uwe,
On 08/05/2015 12:36 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
Hello Pádraig,
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:43:39AM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 04/08/15 03:13, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The watchdog infrastructure is currently purely passive, meaning
it only passes information from user space to drivers
Hello Pádraig,
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 12:43:39AM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 04/08/15 03:13, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > The watchdog infrastructure is currently purely passive, meaning
> > it only passes information from user space to drivers and vice versa.
> >
> > Since watchdog hardware te
On 08/04/2015 04:43 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 04/08/15 03:13, Guenter Roeck wrote:
The watchdog infrastructure is currently purely passive, meaning
it only passes information from user space to drivers and vice versa.
Since watchdog hardware tends to have its own quirks, this can result
in qu
On 04/08/15 03:13, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> The watchdog infrastructure is currently purely passive, meaning
> it only passes information from user space to drivers and vice versa.
>
> Since watchdog hardware tends to have its own quirks, this can result
> in quite complex watchdog drivers. A number
Hi Uwe,
On 08/04/2015 04:24 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
Hello Guenter,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 07:13:26PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
This patch set does not solve all limitations of the watchdog subsystem.
Specifically, it does not add support for the following features.
- It is desirable to
Hello Guenter,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 07:13:26PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> This patch set does not solve all limitations of the watchdog subsystem.
> Specifically, it does not add support for the following features.
>
> - It is desirable to be able to specify a maximum early timeout,
> fro
13 matches
Mail list logo
