[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+U=Dspxp4u5BoxwHCKMJBC5HWywX7ULSS=YBfOGzP1zLP=yVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 13:01:33 +0300
From: Alexandru Ardelean <ardeleanalex@...il.com>
To: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...com>
Cc: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>,
linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, alexandre.torgue@...com,
Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: stm32-dac: Replace indio_dev->mlock with own device lock
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:01 PM Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...com> wrote:
>
> On 8/26/20 8:38 AM, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > From: Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@...log.com>
> >
> > As part of the general cleanup of indio_dev->mlock, this change replaces
> > it with a local lock on the device's state structure.
> >
> > The patch also does a minor whitespace change to align the 'lock' with the
> > 'common' field via tabs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergiu Cuciurean <sergiu.cuciurean@...log.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/dac/stm32-dac.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/dac/stm32-dac.c b/drivers/iio/dac/stm32-dac.c
> > index 092c796fa3d9..fc636812c17e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/dac/stm32-dac.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/dac/stm32-dac.c
> > @@ -26,9 +26,11 @@
> > /**
> > * struct stm32_dac - private data of DAC driver
> > * @common: reference to DAC common data
> > + * @lock: lock to protect the data buffer during regmap ops
>
> Hi Alexandru,
>
> I think the same patch has been sent by Sergiu already [1].
> Jonathan and I had a minor comment at that time: E.g. could you please
> update the comment ?
Oh.
My bad. I didn't follow the discussion closely.
Will send a V2.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/18/254
>
> > */
> > struct stm32_dac {
> > - struct stm32_dac_common *common;
> > + struct stm32_dac_common *common;
>
> Is above change needed?
No.
I can remove it.
Thanks
Alex
>
> Best Regards,
> Fabrice
>
> > + struct mutex lock;
> > };
> >
> > static int stm32_dac_is_enabled(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int channel)
> > @@ -58,10 +60,10 @@ static int stm32_dac_set_enable_state(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int ch,
> > int ret;
> >
> > /* already enabled / disabled ? */
> > - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_lock(&dac->lock);
> > ret = stm32_dac_is_enabled(indio_dev, ch);
> > if (ret < 0 || enable == !!ret) {
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&dac->lock);
> > return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -69,13 +71,13 @@ static int stm32_dac_set_enable_state(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int ch,
> > ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&dac->lock);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > ret = regmap_update_bits(dac->common->regmap, STM32_DAC_CR, msk, en);
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&dac->lock);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > dev_err(&indio_dev->dev, "%s failed\n", en ?
> > "Enable" : "Disable");
> > @@ -327,6 +329,8 @@ static int stm32_dac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > indio_dev->info = &stm32_dac_iio_info;
> > indio_dev->modes = INDIO_DIRECT_MODE;
> >
> > + mutex_init(&dac->lock);
> > +
> > ret = stm32_dac_chan_of_init(indio_dev);
> > if (ret < 0)
> > return ret;
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists