[Top] [All Lists]

Re: watchdog: SOC_MT7621?

To: Paul Bolle <>, John Crispin <>
Subject: Re: watchdog: SOC_MT7621?
From: Guenter Roeck <>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 05:59:50 -0800
Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <>, Ralf Baechle <>, Valentin Rothberg <>,,,
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=aSyQrwy6XJLDH00cGCshoVgyaaQddcQ2MCWlIkfudvY=; b=pqxUZCU0zRHsLj2VT0qWZTu/J82Sdd+ZiOusbKkXq/tILjt3RcMZracTrNm5WwtcGiriWZIX5VBxDa4wmohep0P1nIHY2zOli4AGyoiwNPq3BVd54yTRVbaBSqVSsorLhmmWnEYxOQN26omto9Ft/EmkTmMxL2vebsBSt++hPB4=;
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <>
List-help: <>
List-id: linux-mips <>
List-owner: <>
List-post: <>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <>
List-unsubscribe: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <1423044809.23894.65.camel@x220> <> <1423047893.23022.13.camel@x220> <> <>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
On 02/04/2015 04:22 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
John Crispin schreef op wo 04-02-2015 om 12:10 [+0100]:
i think wim should just drop it and we leave it in openwrt with the
other 1/2 million patches that we have. i prefer to upstream the stuff
without feeling pressured to hurry up, that kills the fun.

Once code is mainlined you'll get fixes written for you, updates done
for you, etc. But you'll also get pointed at defects that require you to
fix them yourself, or see the code removed eventually.

@Wim, can you drop the patch please ?

Why should Wim drop more than the
     || SOC_MT7621


Question is if the driver works with MT7620 as advertised. Either case
it would be odd if the driver advertises itself as MT7621 but only works
for MT7620, so I think it should be dropped entirely for now.

Wim, should I possibly ask Stephen to include my watchdog-next branch
in his -next builds ? This would help us catching such problems earlier.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>