From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Preston Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] ASoC: TDA7802: Add turn-on diagnostic routine Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 17:28:11 +0100 Message-ID: <9b47a360-3b62-b968-b8d5-8639dc4b468d@codethink.co.uk> References: <20190730120937.16271-1-thomas.preston@codethink.co.uk> <20190730120937.16271-4-thomas.preston@codethink.co.uk> <20190730141935.GF4264@sirena.org.uk> <45156592-a90f-b4f8-4d30-9631c03f1280@codethink.co.uk> <20190730155027.GJ4264@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190730155027.GJ4264@sirena.org.uk> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Charles Keepax , Kuninori Morimoto , Kirill Marinushkin , Liam Girdwood , Marco Felsch , Annaliese McDermond , Takashi Iwai , Paul Cercueil , Vinod Koul , Rob Herring , Srinivas Kandagatla , Jerome Brunet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Cheng-Yi Chiang List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 30/07/2019 16:50, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 04:25:56PM +0100, Thomas Preston wrote: >> On 30/07/2019 15:19, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> It is unclear what this mutex usefully protects, it only gets taken when >>> writing to the debugfs file to trigger this diagnostic mode but doesn't >>> do anything to control interactions with any other code path in the >>> driver. > >> If another process reads the debugfs node "diagnostic" while the turn-on >> diagnostic mode is running, this mutex prevents the second process >> restarting the diagnostics. > >> This is redundant if debugfs reads are atomic, but I don't think they are. > > Like I say it's not just debugfs though, there's the standard driver > interface too. > Ah right, I understand. So if we run the turn-on diagnostics routine, there's nothing stopping anyone from interacting with the device in other ways. I guess there's no way to share that mutex with ALSA? In that case, it doesn't matter if this mutex is there or not - this feature is incompatible. How compatible do debugfs interfaces have to be? I was under the impression anything goes. I would argue that the debugfs is better off for having the mutex so that no one re-reads "diagnostic" within the 5s poll timeout. Alternatively, this diagnostic feature could be handled with an external-handler kcontrol SOC_SINGLE_EXT? I'm not sure if this is an atomic interface either. What would be acceptable?