[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5e832756.1c69fb81.19c58.78e8@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:49:47 +0530
From: Rohit Sarkar <rohitsarkar5398@...il.com>
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
Cc: "Sa, Nuno" <Nuno.Sa@...log.com>,
"Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com>,
"jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>,
"stefan.popa@...log.com" <stefan.popa@...log.com>,
"zhongjiang@...wei.com" <zhongjiang@...wei.com>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"Bogdan, Dragos" <Dragos.Bogdan@...log.com>,
"pmeerw@...erw.net" <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
"knaack.h@....de" <knaack.h@....de>,
"Hennerich, Michael" <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] use DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE instead of
DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 01:08:00PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 3/31/20 12:58 PM, Sa, Nuno wrote:
> > Hi Rohit,
> >
> > > From: linux-iio-owner@...r.kernel.org <linux-iio-owner@...r.kernel.org> On
> > > Behalf Of Ardelean, Alexandru
> > > Sent: Montag, 30. März 2020 11:20
> > > To: jic23@...nel.org; rohitsarkar5398@...il.com
> > > Cc: stefan.popa@...log.com; zhongjiang@...wei.com; linux-
> > > iio@...r.kernel.org; Bogdan, Dragos <Dragos.Bogdan@...log.com>;
> > > pmeerw@...erw.net; knaack.h@....de; Hennerich, Michael
> > > <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > > lars@...afoo.de
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] use DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE instead of
> > > DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 10:38 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 12:04:53 +0530
> > > > Rohit Sarkar <rohitsarkar5398@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The debugfs_create_file_unsafe method does not protect the fops given to
> > > > > it from file removal. It must be used with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > which makes the fops aware of the file lifetime.
> > > > >
> > > > > Further using DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE along with
> > > > > debugfs_create_file_unsafe significantly reduces the overhead introduced
> > > by
> > > > > debugfs_create_file which creates a lifetime managing proxy around each
> > > > > fops handed in. Refer [1] for more on this.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes the following warnings reported by coccinelle:
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu//adis16460.c:126:0-23: WARNING:
> > > adis16460_flash_count_fops
> > > > > should be defined with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu//adis16460.c:108:0-23: WARNING:
> > > adis16460_product_id_fops
> > > > > should be defined with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu//adis16460.c:90:0-23: WARNING:
> > > adis16460_serial_number_fops
> > > > > should be defined with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu//adis16400.c:278:0-23: WARNING:
> > > adis16400_flash_count_fops
> > > > > should be defined with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu//adis16400.c:261:0-23: WARNING:
> > > adis16400_product_id_fops
> > > > > should be defined with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]: https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/2369498
> > > > >
> > > > > Rohit Sarkar (2):
> > > > > iio: imu: adis16400: use DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE instead of
> > > > > DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > > iio: imu: adis16460: use DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE instead of
> > > > > DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE
> > > > >
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu/adis16400.c | 4 ++--
> > > > > drivers/iio/imu/adis16460.c | 6 +++---
> > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > Hi Rohit,
> > > >
> > > > You've opened a can of worms with this one. There as a previous series
> > > > posted doing exactly this change back in 2019 by Zhong Jiang (cc'd)
> > > >
> > > > At the time I did a bit of looking into why this had been universally taken
> > > > up cross tree and turned out there are some potential issues.
> > > >
> > > > Alexandru added it to the list of things to test, but I guess it got
> > > > buried under other work and is still outstanding.
> > > >
> > > yep
> > > my bad;
> > > will try to make room these days for that old one
> > >
> > >
> > I don't have the exact parts that this patch is touching but I have other parts where this patch
> > applies and should be same. So, the idea to test this is to read the files in debugfs? Maybe also
> > some unbind + binding?
> >
> > I will try to test this still today...
>
> The stress test is to open the debugfs file, then unbind the device and then
> read from the still open debugfs file.
Yes, also just to be sure, we need to test DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE
along with debugfs_create_file_unsafe. I will send out another patch
that changes debugfs_create_file to debugfs_create_file_unsafe and then
that can be tested.
> - Lars
Thanks,
Rohit
Powered by blists - more mailing lists