linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] iio: remove iio_triggered_buffer_postenable()/iio_triggered_buffer

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: <20200531164020.765822dc@archlinux>
Date:   Sun, 31 May 2020 16:40:20 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:     Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>
Cc:     <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>, <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        <alexandre.torgue@...com>, <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        <lorenzo.bianconi83@...il.com>, <songqiang1304521@...il.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] iio: remove
 iio_triggered_buffer_postenable()/iio_triggered_buffer_predisable()

On Mon, 25 May 2020 14:38:55 +0300
Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com> wrote:

> From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
> 
> This patch should be squashed into the first one, as the first one is
> breaking the build (intentionally) to make the IIO core files easier to
> review.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>
> ---

Friend poke.  Version log?

Other than the wistful comment below (which I'm not expecting you to
do anything about btw!) whole series looks good to me.

These are obviously no functional changes (I think) so it's only really patch 2 that
could do with more eyes and acks.

Far as I can tell that case is fine as well because of the protections
on being in the right mode, but more eyes on that would be great.

So assuming that's fine, what commit message do you want me to use for
the fused single patch?

Thanks,

Jonathan

>  static const struct iio_trigger_ops atlas_interrupt_trigger_ops = {
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c b/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c
> index 17606eca42b4..8e13c53d4360 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c
> @@ -99,20 +99,6 @@ static irqreturn_t iio_simple_dummy_trigger_h(int irq, void *p)
>  }
>  
>  static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops iio_simple_dummy_buffer_setup_ops = {
> -	/*
> -	 * iio_triggered_buffer_postenable:
> -	 * Generic function that simply attaches the pollfunc to the trigger.
> -	 * Replace this to mess with hardware state before we attach the
> -	 * trigger.
> -	 */
> -	.postenable = &iio_triggered_buffer_postenable,
> -	/*
> -	 * iio_triggered_buffer_predisable:
> -	 * Generic function that simple detaches the pollfunc from the trigger.
> -	 * Replace this to put hardware state back again after the trigger is
> -	 * detached but before userspace knows we have disabled the ring.
> -	 */
> -	.predisable = &iio_triggered_buffer_predisable,
>  };
>  
Hmm. Guess we should probably 'invent' a reason to illustrate the bufer
ops in the dummy example.  Anyone feeling creative?