Linux-Samsung-soc Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Andrzej Pietrasiewicz <andrzej.p@collabora.com>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
	patches@opensource.cirrus.com,
	ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>,
	Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux.tyco@gmail.com>,
	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
	Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
	Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@analog.com>,
	Nick Dyer <nick@shmanahar.org>, Ferruh Yigit <fery@cypress.com>,
	Sangwon Jee <jeesw@melfas.com>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br>,
	kernel@collabora.com, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@redhat.com>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <btissoir@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/7] Support inhibiting input devices
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 20:50:07 +0200
Message-ID: <82e9f2ab-a16e-51ee-1413-bedf0122026a@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200602175241.GO89269@dtor-ws>

Hi Dmitry,

W dniu 02.06.2020 o 19:52, Dmitry Torokhov pisze:
> Hi Andrzej,
> 
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 06:56:40PM +0200, Andrzej Pietrasiewicz wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> W dniu 27.05.2020 o 08:34, Dmitry Torokhov pisze:
>>> That said, I think the way we should handle inhibit/uninhibit, is that
>>> if we have the callback defined, then we call it, and only call open and
>>> close if uninhibit or inhibit are _not_ defined.
>>>
>>
>> If I understand you correctly you suggest to call either inhibit,
>> if provided or close, if inhibit is not provided, but not both,
>> that is, if both are provided then on the inhibit path only
>> inhibit is called. And, consequently, you suggest to call either
>> uninhibit or open, but not both. The rest of my mail makes this
>> assumption, so kindly confirm if I understand you correctly.
> 
> Yes, that is correct. If a driver wants really fine-grained control, it
> will provide inhibit (or both inhibit and close), otherwise it will rely
> on close in place of inhibit.
> 
>>
>> In my opinion this idea will not work.
>>
>> The first question is should we be able to inhibit a device
>> which is not opened? In my opinion we should, in order to be
>> able to inhibit a device in anticipation without needing to
>> open it first.
> 
> I agree.
> 
>>
>> Then what does opening (with input_open_device()) an inhibited
>> device mean? Should it succeed or should it fail?
> 
> It should succeed.
> 
>> If it is not
>> the first opening then effectively it boils down to increasing
>> device's and handle's counters, so we can allow it to succeed.
>> If, however, the device is being opened for the first time,
>> the ->open() method wants to be called, but that somehow
>> contradicts the device's inhibited state. So a logical thing
>> to do is to either fail input_open_device() or postpone ->open()
>> invocation to the moment of uninhibiting - and the latter is
>> what the patches in this series currently do.
>>
>> Failing input_open_device() because of the inhibited state is
>> not the right thing to do. Let me explain. Suppose that a device
>> is already inhibited and then a new matching handler appears
>> in the system. Most handlers (apm-power.c, evbug.c, input-leds.c,
>> mac_hid.c, sysrq.c, vt/keyboard.c and rfkill/input.c) don't create
>> any character devices (only evdev.c, joydev.c and mousedev.c do),
>> so for them it makes no sense to delay calling input_open_device()
>> and it is called in handler's ->connect(). If input_open_device()
>> now fails, we have lost the only chance for this ->connect() to
>> succeed.
>>
>> Summarizing, IMO the uninhibit path should be calling both
>> ->open() and ->uninhibit() (if provided), and conversely, the inhibit
>> path should be calling both ->inhibit() and ->close() (if provided).
> 
> So what you are trying to say is that you see inhibit as something that
> is done in addition to what happens in close. But what exactly do you
> want to do in inhibit, in addition to what close is doing?

See below (*).

> 
> In my view, if we want to have a dedicated inhibit callback, then it
> will do everything that close does, they both are aware of each other
> and can sort out the state transitions between them. For drivers that do
> not have dedicated inhibit/uninhibit, we can use open and close
> handlers, and have input core sort out when each should be called. That
> means that we should not call dev->open() in input_open_device() when
> device is inhibited (and same for dev->close() in input_close_device).
> And when uninhibiting, we should not call dev->open() when there are no
> users for the device, and no dev->close() when inhibiting with no users.
> 
> Do you see any problems with this approach?

My concern is that if e.g. both ->open() and ->uninhibit() are provided,
then in certain circumstances ->open() won't be called:

1. users == 0
2. inhibit happens
3. input_open_device() happens, ->open() not called
4. uninhibit happens
5. as part of uninhibit ->uninhibit() is only called, but ->open() is not.

They way I understand your answer is that we implicitly impose requirements
on drivers which choose to implement e.g. both ->open() and ->uninhibit():
in such a case ->uninhibit() should be doing exactly the same things as
->open() does. Which leads to a conclusion that in practice no drivers
should choose to implement both, otherwise they must be aware that
->uninhibit() can be sometimes called instead of ->open(). Then ->open()
becomes synonymous with ->uninhibit(), and ->close() with ->inhibit().
Or, maybe, then ->inhibit() can be a superset of ->close() and
->uninhibit() a superset of ->open().

If such an approach is ok with you, it is ok with me, too.

(*)
Calling both ->inhibit() and ->close() (if they are provided) allows
drivers to go fancy and fail inhibiting (which is impossible using
only ->close() as it does not return a value, but ->inhibit() by design
does). Then ->uninhibit() is mostly for symmetry.

Regards,

Andrzej

  reply index

Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20200506002746.GB89269@dtor-ws>
2020-05-15 16:49 ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-15 16:51   ` [PATCHv2 1/7] Input: add input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-15 16:52   ` [PATCHv2 4/7] iio: adc: exynos: Use input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-15 16:52   ` [PATCHv2 6/7] Input: Add "inhibited" property Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-15 18:19   ` [PATCHv2 0/7] Support inhibiting input devices Hans de Goede
2020-05-17 22:55     ` Peter Hutterer
2020-05-18  2:40       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-05-18  7:36         ` Hans de Goede
2020-05-22 15:35         ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-27  6:13           ` Peter Hutterer
2020-05-18 10:48     ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-18 12:24       ` Hans de Goede
2020-05-18 13:49         ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-18 14:23           ` Hans de Goede
2020-05-19  9:02             ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-05-19  9:36               ` Hans de Goede
2020-05-27  6:34                 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-02 16:56                   ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-02 17:52                     ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-02 18:50                       ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz [this message]
2020-06-02 20:19                         ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-03 13:07                           ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-03 17:38                             ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-03 17:54                               ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-03 19:37                                 ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-04  7:28                                   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-05 17:33                                     ` [PATCH v3 " Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 1/7] Input: add input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 2/7] Input: use input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 3/7] ACPI: button: Access input device's users under appropriate mutex Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 4/7] ACPI: button: Use input_device_enabled() helper Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 5/7] iio: adc: exynos: Use input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 19:49                                         ` Michał Mirosław
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 6/7] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: " Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:33                                       ` [PATCH v3 7/7] Input: Add "inhibited" property Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-05 17:41                                         ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-08 11:22                                           ` [PATCH v4 0/7] Support inhibiting input devices Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 1/7] Input: add input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 2/7] Input: use input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 3/7] ACPI: button: Access input device's users under appropriate mutex Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-24 15:00                                               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-25  5:23                                                 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-25 10:55                                                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 4/7] ACPI: button: Use input_device_enabled() helper Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-25  5:24                                               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 5/7] iio: adc: exynos: Use input_device_enabled() Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-10  1:28                                               ` Michał Mirosław
2020-06-10  7:52                                                 ` [FIXED PATCH " Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 6/7] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: " Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-08 11:22                                             ` [PATCH v4 7/7] Input: Add "inhibited" property Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-10  9:49                                             ` [PATCH v4 0/7] Support inhibiting input devices Hans de Goede
2020-06-10 10:38                                               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-10 13:12                                                 ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-10 13:21                                                   ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-10 13:41                                                     ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-12  8:30                                                       ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-12  8:47                                                         ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-16 17:29                                                         ` [PATCH] Input: document inhibiting Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-16 17:38                                                           ` Randy Dunlap
2020-06-17  7:44                                                           ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-17 10:18                                                             ` [PATCH v2] " Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-17 10:21                                                               ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-17 16:52                                                               ` Randy Dunlap
2020-06-23 13:35                                                               ` Pavel Machek
2020-06-10 14:01                                                     ` [PATCH v4 0/7] Support inhibiting input devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-10 13:52                                                 ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-10 18:28                                                 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-12  8:14                                                   ` Hans de Goede
2020-06-12  8:17                                             ` Hans de Goede
2020-08-03 14:40                                               ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2020-06-07 20:24                                       ` [PATCH v3 " Pavel Machek
2020-06-08  5:37                                         ` Dmitry Torokhov
2020-06-08  9:28                                           ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz

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=82e9f2ab-a16e-51ee-1413-bedf0122026a@collabora.com \
    --to=andrzej.p@collabora.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=btissoir@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=fery@cypress.com \
    --cc=festevam@gmail.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br \
    --cc=jeesw@melfas.com \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kernel@collabora.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=kgene@kernel.org \
    --cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael.hennerich@analog.com \
    --cc=nick@shmanahar.org \
    --cc=patches@opensource.cirrus.com \
    --cc=peter.hutterer@redhat.com \
    --cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    --cc=slemieux.tyco@gmail.com \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=vz@mleia.com \
    /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

Linux-Samsung-soc Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-samsung-soc/0 linux-samsung-soc/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-samsung-soc linux-samsung-soc/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-samsung-soc \
		linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-samsung-soc

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-samsung-soc


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git