linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] iio: core: Match iio_device_claim

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: <DES3XUNSY5DQ.3GYGCUOO0EVQI@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2025 10:59:22 -0500
From: "Kurt Borja" <kuurtb@...il.com>
To: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@...nel.org>, Nuno Sá
 <noname.nuno@...il.com>
Cc: "Kurt Borja" <kuurtb@...il.com>, "Andy Shevchenko"
 <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>, "Lars-Peter Clausen" <lars@...afoo.de>,
 "Michael Hennerich" <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, "Benson Leung"
 <bleung@...omium.org>, "Antoniu Miclaus" <antoniu.miclaus@...log.com>,
 "Gwendal Grignou" <gwendal@...omium.org>, "Shrikant Raskar"
 <raskar.shree97@...il.com>, "Per-Daniel Olsson"
 <perdaniel.olsson@...s.com>, "David Lechner" <dlechner@...libre.com>,
 Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, "Andy Shevchenko"
 <andy@...nel.org>, "Guenter Roeck" <groeck@...omium.org>, "Jonathan
 Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] iio: core: Match iio_device_claim_*() return
 semantics

On Sat Dec 6, 2025 at 1:05 PM -05, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2025 14:23:19 +0000
> Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2025-12-03 at 14:18 -0500, Kurt Borja wrote:
>> > In order to improve API consistency with conditional locks, use
>> > true/false return semantics in iio_device_claim_buffer_mode().
>> > 
>> > This also matches iio_device_claim_direct() return semantics.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@...il.com>
>> > ---  
>> 
>> Even if the rest gets a NACK, I think at least this patch makes sense. In fact I
>> would even extend it so that we have the same inline API with proper annotations:
>> 
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.18/source/include/linux/iio/iio.h#L679
>> 
>> So it really has the same semantics as iio_device_claim_direct()
>
> Yeah. This was on my mental todo list. So great to see Kurt
> dealing with it! :)  These calls are much rarer than the direct ones
> so I wasn't so fussed about getting the sparse coverage. Makes
> sense to do it just wasn't high priority.
>
> As Nuno, suggested though I would like the sparse support for these.
>
> Jonathan

Hi Jonathan,

Great! I'll squash all "semantics" patches and add sparse support.


-- 
 ~ Kurt