On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 06:14:12PM -0600, David Lechner wrote: > On 2/25/21 6:03 PM, William Breathitt Gray wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 03:51:40PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >> On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:32:16 +0900 > >> William Breathitt Gray wrote: > >> > >>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 06:11:46PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 21:13:44 +0900 > >>>> William Breathitt Gray wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The events_queue_size sysfs attribute provides a way for users to > >>>>> dynamically configure the Counter events queue size for the Counter > >>>>> character device interface. The size is in number of struct > >>>>> counter_event data structures. The number of elements will be rounded-up > >>>>> to a power of 2 due to a requirement of the kfifo_alloc function called > >>>>> during reallocation of the queue. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cc: Oleksij Rempel > >>>>> Signed-off-by: William Breathitt Gray > >>>>> --- > >>>>> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-counter | 8 +++++++ > >>>>> drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.h | 2 ++ > >>>>> drivers/counter/counter-sysfs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> 4 files changed, 58 insertions(+) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-counter b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-counter > >>>>> index 847e96f19d19..f6cb2a8b08a7 100644 > >>>>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-counter > >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-counter > >>>>> @@ -212,6 +212,14 @@ Description: > >>>>> both edges: > >>>>> Any state transition. > >>>>> > >>>>> +What: /sys/bus/counter/devices/counterX/events_queue_size > >>>>> +KernelVersion: 5.13 > >>>>> +Contact: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org > >>>>> +Description: > >>>>> + Size of the Counter events queue in number of struct > >>>>> + counter_event data structures. The number of elements will be > >>>>> + rounded-up to a power of 2. > >>>>> + > >>>>> What: /sys/bus/counter/devices/counterX/name > >>>>> KernelVersion: 5.2 > >>>>> Contact: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org > >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.c b/drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.c > >>>>> index 16f02df7f73d..53eea894e13f 100644 > >>>>> --- a/drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.c > >>>>> +++ b/drivers/counter/counter-chrdev.c > >>>>> @@ -375,6 +375,29 @@ void counter_chrdev_remove(struct counter_device *const counter) > >>>>> cdev_del(&counter->chrdev); > >>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> +int counter_chrdev_realloc_queue(struct counter_device *const counter, > >>>>> + size_t queue_size) > >>>>> +{ > >>>>> + int err; > >>>>> + DECLARE_KFIFO_PTR(events, struct counter_event); > >>>>> + unsigned long flags; > >>>>> + > >>>>> + /* Allocate new events queue */ > >>>>> + err = kfifo_alloc(&events, queue_size, GFP_ATOMIC); > >>>> > >>>> Is there any potential for losing events? > >>> > >>> We take the events_list_lock down below so we're safe against missing an > >>> event, but past events currently unread in the queue will be lost. > >>> > >>> Shortening the size of the queue is inherently a destructive process if > >>> we have more events in the current queue than can fit in the new queue. > >>> Because we a liable to lose some events in such a case, I think it's > >>> best to keep the behavior of this reallocation consistent and have it > >>> provide a fresh empty queue every time, as opposed to sometimes dropping > >>> events and sometimes not. > >>> > >>> I also suspect an actual user would be setting the size of their queue > >>> to the required amount before they begin watching events, rather than > >>> adjusting it sporadically during a live operation. > >>> > >> > >> Absolutely agree. As such I wonder if you are better off enforcing this > >> behaviour? If the cdev is open for reading, don't allow the fifo to be > >> resized. > >> > >> Jonathan > > > > I can't really think of a good reason not to, so let's enforce it: if > > the cdev is open, then we'll return an EINVAL if the user attempts to > > resize the queue. > > > > What is a good way to check for this condition? Should I just call > > kref_read() and see if it's greater than 1? For example, in > > counter_chrdev_realloc_queue(): > > > > if (kref_read(&counter->dev.kobj.kref) > 1) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > William Breathitt Gray > > > > Wouldn't EBUSY make more sense? Yes, EBUSY would be better here because the operation isn't necessarily invalid, just unavailable because someone else has the cdev open. William Breathitt Gray