[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151002173714.GA8437@dtor-ws>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:37:14 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: cpaul@...hat.com
Cc: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
Vishnu Patekar <vishnupatekar0510@...il.com>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6.1 1/1] Input: Add userio module
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 01:54:59PM -0400, cpaul@...hat.com wrote:
> +static int userio_device_write(struct serio *id, unsigned char val)
> +{
> + struct userio_device *userio = id->port_data;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + if (!userio)
> + return -1;
I still have the same question: how can this happen? Where do we reset
port data to NULL? What happens if we set to NULL after checking?
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&userio->buf_lock, flags);
> +
> + userio->buf[userio->head] = val;
> + userio->head = (userio->head + 1) % USERIO_BUFSIZE;
> +
> + if (userio->head == userio->tail)
> + dev_warn(userio_misc.this_device,
> + "Buffer overflowed, userio client isn't keeping up");
> +
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&userio->buf_lock, flags);
> +
> + wake_up_interruptible(&userio->waitq);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists