From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752734AbbADLB6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 06:01:58 -0500 Received: from saturn.retrosnub.co.uk ([178.18.118.26]:48198 "EHLO saturn.retrosnub.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751263AbbADLB4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 06:01:56 -0500 Message-ID: <54A91DA1.6080107@kernel.org> Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 11:01:53 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Weinberger , harald@ccbib.org CC: knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, sanjeev_sharma@mentor.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: iio: dht11 Updates References: <1417563176-31972-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <54A53FBF.5000003@kernel.org> <7e4f6a70e48afe96457ebbcf07572224@imap.cosmopool.net> <54A680F8.30209@nod.at> In-Reply-To: <54A680F8.30209@nod.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/01/15 11:28, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 01.01.2015 um 22:18 schrieb harald@ccbib.org: >> Hi! >> >> On Thu, 01 Jan 2015 12:38:23 +0000, Jonathan Cameron >> wrote: >>> On 02/12/14 23:32, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>> Please see my current patches for your driver. >>>> As discussed in an earlier mail I'm testing with the DHT22 sensor only. >>>> With the IRQ changes I see 84 edges. >>>> >>>> >>>> [PATCH 1/4] iio: dht11: Add locking >>>> [PATCH 2/4] iio: dht11: IRQ fixes >>>> [PATCH 3/4] iio: dht11: Logging updates >>>> [PATCH 4/4] iio: dht11: Fix out-of-bounds read >>>> >> >>> I've lost track of where we are with this patch series. >>> Does this cause trouble on any of the parts supported? >> >> Yes, 2/4 needs an update. > > Correct. > >> 1/4 is fine by me, however it was noted that there is already >> locking in the iio core for the in-kernel interface but not >> for the sysfs interface. I think we need locking in the case of >> the sysfs interace as well, but the final decision is yours... > > We definitely need it. > I have more than one sensor attached and collectd queries them. > Without locking collectd manages to hit this race window. > So the issue is real. Locking is needed. Convention has normally been to do this in the driver rather than a subsystem core. That gives more fine grained control and avoids locking when not necessary (some devices will need a lock on data read, others will not). Clearly in this case, the need should have been picked up in review (oops). Sorry about that. > >> 4/4 is obviously right. >> >> 3/4 is cleanup. I'd rather defer this to later and do it right, >> because right now this patch is cosmetic and doesn't get rid of >> the deeper issues. I'll start to work on a cleanup series once >> the fixes are merged. > > Agreed. > >> Richard, what's your timeframe to send an updated series? >> I can send an update if you don't have time. > > It would be great if you can send an updated version of 2/4. > I don't have a DHT11 sensor (only DHT22) and I'm still recovering > from a cold. > > Thanks > //richard > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >