All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gargi Sharma <gs051095@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Alison Schofield <amsfield22@gmail.com>,
	 outreachy-kernel <outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,  Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
	 Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	 Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v3] staging: iio: update locking method during frequency writes
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:04:54 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOCi2DFGCyj2jWsG0Dpf75kbsHzHSv2EUECuPSa64hx+UZCbNw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98194f4f-55e3-9f74-d4c7-a87b4344db3d@kernel.org>

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> On 30/03/17 19:25, Alison Schofield wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 07:22:49PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On 30/03/17 10:33, Gargi Sharma wrote:
>>>> The driver needs to insure atomicity during frequency
>>>> changes of bus and device. The iiodev->mlock as used
>>>> was not doing that. Replace it with the drivers existing
>>>> buffer lock and introduce an auxiliary spi_write() that does
>>>> not hold the lock.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gargi Sharma <gs051095@gmail.com>
>>> Only one comment on this.  Why an RFC?  I nearly
>>> ignored this in my sweep of easy patches to pick up
>>> this evening purely because I thought there might still
>>> be something that needed real thought in it.
>>
>> Oh, that was my bad influence!
>> We were reviewing proposals for these in Outreachy and I'd
>> suggested the RFC label for the proposals.  Thanks for
>> addressing it.
>> alisons
> Was fair enough for round one - though saying why it might
> need comments in the patch description is always good.
>
> By V3 with all positive comments, probably fine to loose the
> RFC :)

I was skeptical of the RFC tag hence put the PATCH in subject prefix
as well. :) Anyways, lesson learnt for future!

Thanks,
Gargi
>>
>>>
>>> It's a clean nice patch that I don't think any substantial
>>> questions have been raised against - so just submit it as
>>> patch. As an RFC it is underselling itself!
>>>
>>> Anyhow, never mind, I did look and have applied it ;)
>>>
>>> Applied to the togreg branch of iio.git and pushed out
>>> as testing for the autobuilders to play with it.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>>         - Removed unnecessary ret variable inside
>>>>           __ade7754_spi_write_reg_8 function.
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>         - Added auxiliary function.
>>>>         - Updated the buf_lock comment appropriately.
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7754.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7754.c b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7754.c
>>>> index c8d2d4c..91f8740 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7754.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7754.c
>>>> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@
>>>>  /**
>>>>   * struct ade7754_state - device instance specific data
>>>>   * @us:                    actual spi_device
>>>> - * @buf_lock:              mutex to protect tx and rx
>>>> + * @buf_lock:              mutex to protect tx, rx and write frequency
>>>>   * @tx:                    transmit buffer
>>>>   * @rx:                    receive buffer
>>>>   **/
>>>> @@ -108,17 +108,25 @@ struct ade7754_state {
>>>>     u8                      rx[ADE7754_MAX_RX];
>>>>  };
>>>>
>>>> -static int ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(struct device *dev, u8 reg_address, u8 val)
>>>> +/* Unlocked version of ade7754_spi_write_reg_8 function */
>>>> +static int __ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(struct device *dev, u8 reg_address, u8 val)
>>>>  {
>>>> -   int ret;
>>>>     struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_to_iio_dev(dev);
>>>>     struct ade7754_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>>>
>>>> -   mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>>>>     st->tx[0] = ADE7754_WRITE_REG(reg_address);
>>>>     st->tx[1] = val;
>>>> +   return spi_write(st->us, st->tx, 2);
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> -   ret = spi_write(st->us, st->tx, 2);
>>>> +static int ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(struct device *dev, u8 reg_address, u8 val)
>>>> +{
>>>> +   int ret;
>>>> +   struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_to_iio_dev(dev);
>>>> +   struct ade7754_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>>> +
>>>> +   mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>>>> +   ret = __ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(dev, reg_address, val);
>>>>     mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>>>>
>>>>     return ret;
>>>> @@ -513,7 +521,7 @@ static ssize_t ade7754_write_frequency(struct device *dev,
>>>>     if (!val)
>>>>             return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> -   mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>>>> +   mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>>>>
>>>>     t = 26000 / val;
>>>>     if (t > 0)
>>>> @@ -531,10 +539,10 @@ static ssize_t ade7754_write_frequency(struct device *dev,
>>>>     reg &= ~(3 << 3);
>>>>     reg |= t << 3;
>>>>
>>>> -   ret = ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(dev, ADE7754_WAVMODE, reg);
>>>> +   ret = __ade7754_spi_write_reg_8(dev, ADE7754_WAVMODE, reg);
>>>>
>>>>  out:
>>>> -   mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>>>> +   mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>>>>
>>>>     return ret ? ret : len;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>> --
>> 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
>>
>


      reply	other threads:[~2017-03-30 18:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-30  9:33 [RFC/PATCH v3] staging: iio: update locking method during frequency writes Gargi Sharma
2017-03-30 18:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-03-30 18:25   ` Alison Schofield
2017-03-30 18:28     ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-03-30 18:34       ` Gargi Sharma [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAOCi2DFGCyj2jWsG0Dpf75kbsHzHSv2EUECuPSa64hx+UZCbNw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=gs051095@gmail.com \
    --cc=Michael.Hennerich@analog.com \
    --cc=amsfield22@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.