[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <69a7ca77055fc57cff6d6be95fb5796723171230.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2023 17:10:01 +0100
From: Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Nuno Sa via B4 Relay
<devnull+nuno.sa.analog.com@...nel.org>
Cc: nuno.sa@...log.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Olivier MOYSAN <olivier.moysan@...s.st.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] iio: adc: ad9467: add mutex to struct ad9467_state
On Mon, 2023-12-04 at 15:23 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:20:19 +0100
> Nuno Sa via B4 Relay <devnull+nuno.sa.analog.com@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>
> >
> > When calling ad9467_set_scale(), multiple calls to ad9467_spi_write()
> > are done which means we need to properly protect the whole operation so
> > we are sure we will be in a sane state if two concurrent calls occur.
> >
> > Fixes: ad6797120238 ("iio: adc: ad9467: add support AD9467 ADC")
> > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/adc/ad9467.c | 6 +++++-
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ad9467.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ad9467.c
> > index 04474dbfa631..91821dee03b7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ad9467.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ad9467.c
> > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
> > *
> > * Copyright 2012-2020 Analog Devices Inc.
> > */
> > -
> > +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/mutex.h>
> > #include <linux/device.h>
> > @@ -122,6 +122,8 @@ struct ad9467_state {
> > unsigned int output_mode;
> >
> > struct gpio_desc *pwrdown_gpio;
> > + /* protect against concurrent accesses to the device */
> Not very specific. Concurrent access usually fine at granularity of
> individual read/write as the bus locks protect it. What state
> is actually being protected? A shared buffer or some state that we
> need to ensure remains consistent between driver and device?
At this point not any buffer/data... Just making sure things remain consistent
(typical case when you have multiple reads/writes to the device). That's why a tried
to emphasize "accesses to the device". Maybe I should make it explicit I'm speaking
about multiple reads/writes.
- Nuno Sá
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists