From: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com>
To: "Simon Arlott" <simon@fire.lp0.eu>,
"Álvaro Fernández Rojas" <noltari@gmail.com>,
"Jonas Gorski" <jogo@openwrt.org>
Cc: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net>,
linux-leds@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] leds-bcm6328: Reuse bcm6328_led_set() instead of copying its functionality
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 16:41:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <563A2731.40204@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56327821.8020508@simon.arlott.org.uk>
Hi Simon,
Thanks for the patch. Generally this patch touches two
areas - replacement of redundant code with bcm6328_led_set,
and locking reorganization. These should be split into
two separate patches. Nonetheless, I've noticed some
issues in the code, please refer below.
On 10/29/2015 08:48 PM, Simon Arlott wrote:
> When ensuring a consistent initial LED state in bcm6328_led (as they may
> be blinking instead of on/off), the LED register is set using a copy of
> bcm6328_led_set(). To avoid further errors relating to active low handling,
> call this function directly instead.
>
> As bcm6328_led_set() expects to acquire the spinlock, narrow the locking
> to only cover reading of the current state. There is no need to hold the
> spinlock between reading the current value and setting it again because
> the LED device has not yet been registered.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu>
> ---
> drivers/leds/leds-bcm6328.c | 14 +++++---------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-bcm6328.c b/drivers/leds/leds-bcm6328.c
> index c7ea5c6..db327bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-bcm6328.c
> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-bcm6328.c
> @@ -264,7 +264,6 @@ static int bcm6328_led(struct device *dev, struct device_node *nc, u32 reg,
> unsigned long *blink_leds, unsigned long *blink_delay)
> {
> struct bcm6328_led *led;
> - unsigned long flags;
> const char *state;
> int rc;
>
> @@ -286,13 +285,12 @@ static int bcm6328_led(struct device *dev, struct device_node *nc, u32 reg,
> "linux,default-trigger",
> NULL);
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);
> if (!of_property_read_string(nc, "default-state", &state)) {
> if (!strcmp(state, "on")) {
> led->cdev.brightness = LED_FULL;
> } else if (!strcmp(state, "keep")) {
> void __iomem *mode;
> - unsigned long val, shift;
> + unsigned long val, shift, flags;
>
> shift = bcm6328_pin2shift(led->pin);
> if (shift / 16)
> @@ -300,9 +298,12 @@ static int bcm6328_led(struct device *dev, struct device_node *nc, u32 reg,
> else
> mode = mem + BCM6328_REG_MODE_LO;
>
> + spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);
> val = bcm6328_led_read(mode) >>
> BCM6328_LED_SHIFT(shift % 16);
> val &= BCM6328_LED_MODE_MASK;
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> +
> if ((led->active_low && val == BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON) ||
> (!led->active_low && val == BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF))
> led->cdev.brightness = LED_FULL;
> @@ -315,12 +316,7 @@ static int bcm6328_led(struct device *dev, struct device_node *nc, u32 reg,
> led->cdev.brightness = LED_OFF;
> }
>
> - if ((led->active_low && led->cdev.brightness == LED_FULL) ||
> - (!led->active_low && led->cdev.brightness == LED_OFF))
> - bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON);
> - else
> - bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF);
There are some problems with active_low mode here, I didn't recognize
earlier.
I'd expect that active_low implies reverse logic, i.e.:
LED_FULL -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF);
LED_OFF -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON);
Let's take a look at bcm6328_led_set:
if ((led->active_low && value == LED_OFF) ||
(!led->active_low && value != LED_OFF))
bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF);
else
bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON);
which, for active_low case, boils down to:
LED_FULL -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON);
LED_OFF -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF);
and for !active_low case to:
LED_FULL -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF);
LED_OFF -> bcm6328_led_mode(led, BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON);
so, this is the other way round.
In bcm6328_led we have:
if ((led->active_low && val == BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON) ||
(!led->active_low && val == BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF))
led->cdev.brightness = LED_FULL;
else
led->cdev.brightness = LED_OFF;
which, for active_low case, boils down to:
BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON -> led->cdev.brightness = LED_FULL
BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF -> led->cdev.brightness = LED_OFF
and for !active_low case to:
BCM6328_LED_MODE_ON -> led->cdev.brightness = LED_OFF
BCM6328_LED_MODE_OFF -> led->cdev.brightness = LED_FULL
again, the other way round.
All this looks like active_low really means active high.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Alvaro, Jonas, could you also help to clarify this discrepancy?
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> + bcm6328_led_set(&led->cdev, led->cdev.brightness);
>
> led->cdev.brightness_set = bcm6328_led_set;
> led->cdev.blink_set = bcm6328_blink_set;
>
--
Best Regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-04 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-24 16:53 [PATCH] leds: bcm6328: Handle default-state of LEDs correctly Simon Arlott
2015-10-26 8:45 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-10-26 12:36 ` Simon Arlott
2015-10-28 10:56 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-10-29 19:48 ` [PATCH] leds-bcm6328: Reuse bcm6328_led_set() instead of copying its functionality Simon Arlott
2015-11-04 15:41 ` Jacek Anaszewski [this message]
2015-11-04 15:46 ` Álvaro Fernández Rojas
2015-11-05 10:41 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-15 13:32 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Simon Arlott
2015-11-15 13:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] leds-bcm6328: Swap LED ON and OFF definitions Simon Arlott
2015-11-23 10:20 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-16 14:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] leds-bcm6328: Reuse bcm6328_led_set() instead of copying its functionality Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-16 20:24 ` [PATCH 1/2 (v2)] " Simon Arlott
2015-11-16 21:33 ` Álvaro Fernández Rojas
2015-11-17 7:42 ` Simon Arlott
2015-11-17 8:06 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-17 8:15 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-22 20:40 ` [PATCH 1/2 (v3)] " Simon Arlott
2015-11-23 10:19 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2015-11-23 10:20 ` [PATCH 1/2 (v2)] " Jacek Anaszewski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=563A2731.40204@samsung.com \
--to=j.anaszewski@samsung.com \
--cc=jogo@openwrt.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-leds@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=noltari@gmail.com \
--cc=rpurdie@rpsys.net \
--cc=simon@fire.lp0.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome