* [PATCH v4] staging: Use buf_lock instead of mlock and Refactor code
@ 2017-03-18 18:44 simran singhal
2017-03-19 10:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: simran singhal @ 2017-03-18 18:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lars
Cc: Michael.Hennerich, jic23, Hartmut Knaack, Peter Meerwald-Stadler,
Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-iio, devel, linux-kernel,
outreachy-kernel
The IIO subsystem is redefining iio_dev->mlock to be used by
the IIO core only for protecting device operating mode changes.
ie. Changes between INDIO_DIRECT_MODE, INDIO_BUFFER_* modes.
In this driver, mlock was being used to protect hardware state
changes. Replace it with buf_lock in the devices global data.
As buf_lock protects both the adis16060_spi_write() and
adis16060_spi_read() functions and both are always called in
pair. First write, then read. Thus, refactor the code to have
one single function adis16060_spi_write_than_read() which is
protected by the existing buf_lock.
Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhalsimran0@gmail.com>
---
v4:
-Refactored code
-change commit subject
-change commit message
drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
index c9d46e7..39ddd55 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct adis16060_state {
static struct iio_dev *adis16060_iio_dev;
-static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
+static int adis16060_spi_write_than_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val, u16 *val2)
{
int ret;
struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
@@ -48,17 +48,11 @@ static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
st->buf[2] = val; /* The last 8 bits clocked in are latched */
ret = spi_write(st->us_w, st->buf, 3);
- mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
- return ret;
-}
-
-static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
-{
- int ret;
- struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
-
- mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
+ return ret;
+ }
ret = spi_read(st->us_r, st->buf, 3);
@@ -67,10 +61,10 @@ static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
* starts to place data MSB first on the DOUT line at
* the 6th falling edge of SCLK
*/
- if (!ret)
- *val = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
- (st->buf[1] << 4) |
- ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
+ if (!ret)
+ *val2 = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
+ (st->buf[1] << 4) |
+ ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
return ret;
@@ -83,20 +77,17 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
{
u16 tval = 0;
int ret;
+ struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
switch (mask) {
case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
/* Take the iio_dev status lock */
- mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
- ret = adis16060_spi_write(indio_dev, chan->address);
+ mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
+ ret = adis16060_spi_write_than_read(indio_dev, chan->address, &tval);
if (ret < 0)
goto out_unlock;
- ret = adis16060_spi_read(indio_dev, &tval);
- if (ret < 0)
- goto out_unlock;
-
- mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
+ mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
*val = tval;
return IIO_VAL_INT;
case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OFFSET:
@@ -112,7 +103,7 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
return -EINVAL;
out_unlock:
- mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
+ mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
return ret;
}
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4] staging: Use buf_lock instead of mlock and Refactor code
2017-03-18 18:44 [PATCH v4] staging: Use buf_lock instead of mlock and Refactor code simran singhal
@ 2017-03-19 10:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-03-19 10:24 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2017-03-19 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: simran singhal, lars
Cc: Michael.Hennerich, Hartmut Knaack, Peter Meerwald-Stadler,
Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-iio, devel, linux-kernel,
outreachy-kernel
On 18/03/17 18:44, simran singhal wrote:
> The IIO subsystem is redefining iio_dev->mlock to be used by
> the IIO core only for protecting device operating mode changes.
> ie. Changes between INDIO_DIRECT_MODE, INDIO_BUFFER_* modes.
>
> In this driver, mlock was being used to protect hardware state
> changes. Replace it with buf_lock in the devices global data.
>
> As buf_lock protects both the adis16060_spi_write() and
> adis16060_spi_read() functions and both are always called in
> pair. First write, then read. Thus, refactor the code to have
> one single function adis16060_spi_write_than_read() which is
> protected by the existing buf_lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhalsimran0@gmail.com>
Hi Simran,
A couple of minor comments and opportunity to further improve
the, now simpler, code flow.
Thanks,
Jonathan
> ---
>
> v4:
> -Refactored code
> -change commit subject
> -change commit message
>
> drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
> index c9d46e7..39ddd55 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct adis16060_state {
>
> static struct iio_dev *adis16060_iio_dev;
>
> -static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
> +static int adis16060_spi_write_than_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val, u16 *val2)
val and val2 often have specific meanings in IIO. I'd prefer these to be renamed to
val => conf (as it sets the configuration) and val2 => val.
> {
> int ret;
> struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> @@ -48,17 +48,11 @@ static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
> mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
> st->buf[2] = val; /* The last 8 bits clocked in are latched */
> ret = spi_write(st->us_w, st->buf, 3);
> - mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>
> - return ret;
> -}
> -
> -static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
> -{
> - int ret;
> - struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> -
> - mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> ret = spi_read(st->us_r, st->buf, 3);
>
> @@ -67,10 +61,10 @@ static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
> * starts to place data MSB first on the DOUT line at
> * the 6th falling edge of SCLK
> */
> - if (!ret)
> - *val = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
> - (st->buf[1] << 4) |
> - ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
> + if (!ret)
Please run checkpatch.pl over your patches. Looks like
you ended up with spaces instead of a tab in the line above.
> + *val2 = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
> + (st->buf[1] << 4) |
> + ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
> mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>
> return ret;
> @@ -83,20 +77,17 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> {
> u16 tval = 0;
> int ret;
> + struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>
> switch (mask) {
> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
> /* Take the iio_dev status lock */
> - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> - ret = adis16060_spi_write(indio_dev, chan->address);
> + mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
> + ret = adis16060_spi_write_than_read(indio_dev, chan->address, &tval);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto out_unlock;
>
> - ret = adis16060_spi_read(indio_dev, &tval);
> - if (ret < 0)
This ugly goto construction arguably made sense when there were two of them. Now
you have only one just bring the mutex_unlock inline and return directly.
> - goto out_unlock;
> -
> - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
> *val = tval;
> return IIO_VAL_INT;
> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OFFSET:
> @@ -112,7 +103,7 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> return -EINVAL;
>
> out_unlock:
> - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
> return ret;
> }
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4] staging: Use buf_lock instead of mlock and Refactor code
2017-03-19 10:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
@ 2017-03-19 10:24 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: SIMRAN SINGHAL @ 2017-03-19 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Cameron
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen, Michael Hennerich, Hartmut Knaack,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-iio, devel,
linux-kernel, outreachy-kernel
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> On 18/03/17 18:44, simran singhal wrote:
>> The IIO subsystem is redefining iio_dev->mlock to be used by
>> the IIO core only for protecting device operating mode changes.
>> ie. Changes between INDIO_DIRECT_MODE, INDIO_BUFFER_* modes.
>>
>> In this driver, mlock was being used to protect hardware state
>> changes. Replace it with buf_lock in the devices global data.
>>
>> As buf_lock protects both the adis16060_spi_write() and
>> adis16060_spi_read() functions and both are always called in
>> pair. First write, then read. Thus, refactor the code to have
>> one single function adis16060_spi_write_than_read() which is
>> protected by the existing buf_lock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhalsimran0@gmail.com>
> Hi Simran,
>
> A couple of minor comments and opportunity to further improve
> the, now simpler, code flow.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>> ---
>>
>> v4:
>> -Refactored code
>> -change commit subject
>> -change commit message
>>
>> drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------------------
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
>> index c9d46e7..39ddd55 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/gyro/adis16060_core.c
>> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct adis16060_state {
>>
>> static struct iio_dev *adis16060_iio_dev;
>>
>> -static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
>> +static int adis16060_spi_write_than_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val, u16 *val2)
> val and val2 often have specific meanings in IIO. I'd prefer these to be renamed to
> val => conf (as it sets the configuration) and val2 => val.
>> {
>> int ret;
>> struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>> @@ -48,17 +48,11 @@ static int adis16060_spi_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u8 val)
>> mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>> st->buf[2] = val; /* The last 8 bits clocked in are latched */
>> ret = spi_write(st->us_w, st->buf, 3);
>> - mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>>
>> - return ret;
>> -}
>> -
>> -static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
>> -{
>> - int ret;
>> - struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>> -
>> - mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>>
>> ret = spi_read(st->us_r, st->buf, 3);
>>
>> @@ -67,10 +61,10 @@ static int adis16060_spi_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u16 *val)
>> * starts to place data MSB first on the DOUT line at
>> * the 6th falling edge of SCLK
>> */
>> - if (!ret)
>> - *val = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
>> - (st->buf[1] << 4) |
>> - ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
>> + if (!ret)
> Please run checkpatch.pl over your patches. Looks like
> you ended up with spaces instead of a tab in the line above.
OOPS! My bad should have run checkpatch.pl
over patch.
Will correct all the checkpatch.pl issues and resend.
>> + *val2 = ((st->buf[0] & 0x3) << 12) |
>> + (st->buf[1] << 4) |
>> + ((st->buf[2] >> 4) & 0xF);
>> mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>>
>> return ret;
>> @@ -83,20 +77,17 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>> {
>> u16 tval = 0;
>> int ret;
>> + struct adis16060_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>
>> switch (mask) {
>> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
>> /* Take the iio_dev status lock */
>> - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>> - ret = adis16060_spi_write(indio_dev, chan->address);
>> + mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock);
>> + ret = adis16060_spi_write_than_read(indio_dev, chan->address, &tval);
>> if (ret < 0)
>> goto out_unlock;
>>
>> - ret = adis16060_spi_read(indio_dev, &tval);
>> - if (ret < 0)
> This ugly goto construction arguably made sense when there were two of them. Now
> you have only one just bring the mutex_unlock inline and return directly.
Will remove this and resend.
>> - goto out_unlock;
>> -
>> - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>> *val = tval;
>> return IIO_VAL_INT;
>> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OFFSET:
>> @@ -112,7 +103,7 @@ static int adis16060_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> out_unlock:
>> - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
>> + mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock);
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-03-19 10:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-03-18 18:44 [PATCH v4] staging: Use buf_lock instead of mlock and Refactor code simran singhal
2017-03-19 10:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2017-03-19 10:24 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®