From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> To: Alexandru Ardelean <ardeleanalex@gmail.com> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>, Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@analog.com>, linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kgene@kernel.org, Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@analog.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: exynos_adc: Replace indio_dev->mlock with own device lock Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:33:35 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200829163335.3a9c420c@archlinux> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CA+U=Dsoo6YABe5ODLp+eFNPGFDjk5ZeQEceGkqjxXcVEhLWubw@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:53:44 +0300 Alexandru Ardelean <ardeleanalex@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 9:57 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 04:22:03PM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote: > > > From: Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@analog.com> > > > > > > As part of the general cleanup of indio_dev->mlock, this change replaces > > > it with a local lock, to protect potential concurrent access to the > > > completion callback during a conversion. > > > > I don't know the bigger picture (and no links here for general cleanup) > > but I assume it is part of wider work and that mlock is unwanted. In > > such case: > > > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> > > > > If it is part of some bigger work, please put a link to lore.kernel.org > > under separators ---, so everyone can get the context. > > Will keep that in mind. > I am not sure if there is a lore.kernel.org link that's easy to find > for a discussion on this topic, maybe I can describe it here and use > the link [from this later]. > > This was something that popped up during reviews we got from Jonathan > [or others], saying "please don't use indio_dev->mlock, that is an IIO > framework lock, and an IIO driver should not use it". Shortest one is the docs for that lock say don't use it directly in a driver :) https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/iio/iio.h#L495 > Reasons include [and some may be repeated a bit]: > - this could cause a deadlock if the IIO framework holds this lock and > an IIO driver also tries to get a hold of this lock > - similar to the previous point, this mlock is taken by > iio_device_claim_direct_mode() and released by > iio_device_release_direct_mode() ; which means that mlock aims to > become more of an IIO framework lock, than a general usage lock; > - this wasn't policed/reviewed intensely in the older driver [a few > years ago], but has become a point in recent reviews; > - if we want to develop/enhance the IIO framework, some elements like > this need to be taken care of, as more drivers get added and more > complexity gets added; One side note here is we want to make all this [INTERN] state in struct iio_dev opaque to drivers. It'll take a while as the boundary gets crossed in various drivers. > - there is an element of fairness [obviously], where someone writing a > new IIO driver, takes an older one as example, and gets hit on the > review; the person feels they did a good job in mimicking the old > driver; their feeling is correct; the IIO framework should provide > good references and/or cleanup existing drivers; > - same as the previous point, we don't want to keep telling people > writing new IIO drivers [and starting out with IIO] to "not use mlock > [because it was copied from an old driver]"; it's more/needless review > work Good explanation. Thanks, Jonathan > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > Krzysztof > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@analog.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@analog.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/iio/adc/exynos_adc.c | 12 ++++++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-29 15:33 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-08-26 13:22 Alexandru Ardelean 2020-08-27 6:56 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2020-08-27 8:53 ` Alexandru Ardelean 2020-08-29 15:33 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message] 2020-08-29 15:35 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-09-16 9:31 ` [PATCH v2] " Alexandru Ardelean 2020-09-19 15:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=20200829163335.3a9c420c@archlinux \ --to=jic23@kernel.org \ --cc=alexandru.ardelean@analog.com \ --cc=ardeleanalex@gmail.com \ --cc=kgene@kernel.org \ --cc=krzk@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=sergiu.cuciurean@analog.com \ --subject='Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: exynos_adc: Replace indio_dev->mlock with own device lock' \ /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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).