linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: ad7606: use iio_device_{claim|release}_direct

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5705501D.60504@metafoo.de>
Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 20:06:21 +0200
From:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
To:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Alison Schofield <amsfield22@...il.com>,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	knaack.h@....de, Michael.Hennerich@...log.com, pmeerw@...erw.net,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: ad7606: use
 iio_device_{claim|release}_direct_mode()

On 04/03/2016 11:09 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 01/04/16 17:53, Alison Schofield wrote:
>> Two instances are moved to the new claim/release API:
>>
>> In the first instance, the driver was using mlock followed by
>> iio_buffer_enabled(). Replace that code with the new API to guarantee
>> the device stays in direct mode. There is no change in driver behavior.
>>
>> In the second instance, the driver was not using mlock to hold the
>> device in direct mode, but should have been.  Here we introduce the
>> new API to guarantee direct mode. This is a change in driver behavior.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alison Schofield <amsfield22@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7606_core.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7606_core.c
b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7606_core.c
>> index 6dbc811..f914b8d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7606_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7606_core.c
>> @@ -88,12 +88,12 @@ static int ad7606_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>>
>>  	switch (m) {
>>  	case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
>> -		mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>> -		if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev))
>> -			ret = -EBUSY;
>> -		else
>> -			ret = ad7606_scan_direct(indio_dev, chan->address);
>> -		mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>> +		ret = iio_device_claim_direct_mode(indio_dev);
>> +		if (ret)
>> +			return ret;
>> +
>> +		ret = ad7606_scan_direct(indio_dev, chan->address);
>> +		iio_device_release_direct_mode(indio_dev);
>>
>>  		if (ret < 0)
>>  			return ret;
>> @@ -411,8 +411,9 @@ static irqreturn_t ad7606_interrupt(int irq, void
*dev_id)
>>  	struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_id;
>>  	struct ad7606_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>
>> -	if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
>> +	if (!iio_device_claim_direct_mode(indio_dev))  {
>>  		schedule_work(&st->poll_work);
>> +		iio_device_release_direct_mode(indio_dev);
> Unfortunately this won't work.  That interrupt is still in traditional non
> threaded form.  This will take a mutex in a top half interrupt handler
> where a sleep cannot occur.
>
> I'm just wondering how expensive it would be to fix this by moving that over
> to a threaded handler.  In the poll_work case (buffer) it would be cleaner
to do
> so. I'm really confused what the intended interrupt handler
> is in here.  I 'think' the sequence is:
>
> Trigger fires the convst pin whether in top half or the bottom half of
> a threaded interrupt, but not both - I guess this works, if it is rather
> 'unusual'.
>
> We then get a interrupt to indicate that it has finished conversion and that
> filters through to actually fill the buffer via a traditional top half /
> bottom half interrupt handler.
>
> So if we were to convert that to a threaded interrupt (with no top half / non
> threaded part), we could drop the schedule_work and just call
> ad7606_poll_bh_to_ring from the thread handler.
>
> In the direct read case I doubt we care about the delay in dropping to a
> thread prior to signalling the data is ready.
>
> Can't think why this driver is still in staging :)

Yeah, we should leave this driver out from the conversion for now. The whole
convst pin handling need a major rework. It shouldn't really be in the
driver and usually you wouldn't want to use to use a GPIO and software timer
since that gives you way to much jitter for good results. You'd probably use
something like a PWM.

>
> Lars, any interest from Analog in getting this one cleaned up?  Also
> do you have any test hardware, if we mess around with this interrupt handling?

I have the hardware somewhere in some storage bay, but just converting this
over to threaded interrupt handling is not really a solution. So, if you
want to get rid of the iio_buffer_enabled() in the interrupt handler a
simple solution is to register preenable and postdisable callbacks where you
set a flag in the driver struct to indicate that it is in buffered mode or not.