Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] iio: remove iio_triggered_buffer_postenable()/iio_triggered_buffer_predisable()

["Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@analog.com>]

On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 13:37 +0000, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
> [External]
> 
> On 02.06.2020 11:54, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 07:50:23 +0000
> > "Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@analog.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 16:40 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 25 May 2020 14:38:55 +0300
> > > > Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@analog.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.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@metafoo.de>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@analog.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > Friend poke.  Version log?
> > > 
> > > Version log is in the first patch.
> > > I was wondering if I omitted it.
> > > Seems, this time I didn't. But I admit, it probably would have been better
> > > here.
> > Ah fair enough.  That works fine if there is a cover letter but not
> > so much just putting things in the first patch!
> > > > 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?
> > > 
> > > Commit message-wise: I think the message in the first commit would be
> > > mostly sufficient.
> > > No idea what other description would be needed.
> > > 
> > > So, maybe something like:
> > > 
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > All devices using a triggered buffer need to attach and detach the trigger
> > > to the device in order to properly work. Instead of doing this in each and
> > > every driver by hand move this into the core.
> > > 
> > > At this point in time, all drivers should have been resolved to
> > > attach/detach the poll-function in the same order.
> > > 
> > > This patch removes all explicit calls of iio_triggered_buffer_postenable()
> > > & iio_triggered_buffer_predisable() in all drivers, since the core handles
> > > now the pollfunc attach/detach.
> > > 
> > > The more peculiar change is for the 'at91-sama5d2_adc' driver, since it's
> > > not obvious that removing the hooks doesn't break anything**
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > 
> > Looks good.
> > 
> > > ** for the comment about 'at91-sama5d2_adc', we really do need to get some
> > > testing; otherwise this risks breaking it.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I can test it, do we have any patchwork so I can easily download the 
> patches ?
> I have issues when applying them.

Is this good?

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11568743/
Series:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-iio/list/?series=293141

Many thanks
Alex

> 
> Thanks !
> 
> > Agreed.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 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?
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel__;!!A3Ni8CS0y2Y!ulH92S3o_JWLMQfg5VBrFknwc_-a0K5AHpJBrTEB-RtYEp7PnRJ9jA_EacOzFQmbNIKO-Q$