Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] watchdog: report effective timeout

Hey Simon,

> Since the uclass now knows both the requested value and the
> driver-reported maximum, would it be cleaner to have the uclass clamp
> timeout_ms before calling ops->start(), rather than reporting a value
> the driver may or may not honour?

Agreed, will be done in v3.

> The sandbox driver has had to grow
> its own clamp in patch 4 purely so the print path is testable. If the
> uclass clamped, real drivers would never see an out-of-range value and
> the sandbox change in patch 4 would not be needed. What do you think?

Sandbox will still need to set max_timeout_ms in probe so the uclass knows
the limit, but v3 will get rid of the extra clamping in sandbox_wdt_start().

Best,
Juuso