[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfAAyHEnOS7npPOJqpgMgJpaukFcYC+1TH+UhTK5iksMg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 18:03:25 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Denis Pauk <pauk.denis@...il.com>
Cc: Eugene Shalygin <eugene.shalygin@...il.com>,
Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
thomas@...ssschuh.net, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: (nct6775) Use nct6775_*() lock function
pointers in nct6775_data.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:29 PM Denis Pauk <pauk.denis@...il.com> wrote:
Better subject line (after prefix): Use lock function pointers in nct6775_data
(note no period and drop of redundancy)
> Prepare for platform specific callbacks usage:
> * Use nct6775 lock function pointers in struct nct6775_data instead
> direct calls.
...
> +static int nct6775_lock(struct nct6775_data *data)
> +{
> + mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void nct6775_unlock(struct nct6775_data *data, struct device *dev)
> +{
> + mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +}
Have you run `sparse` against this?
Install `sparse` in your distribution and make kernel with
`make W=1 C=1 CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ ...`
It might require using special annotations to these functions to make
static analysers happy.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists