All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>
To: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] RTC subsystem, dev interface
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:50:21 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200601082150.22213.dtor_core@ameritech.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060108231255.609424000@linux>

On Sunday 08 January 2006 18:12, Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> +	int err;
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = container_of(inode->i_cdev,
> +					struct rtc_device, char_dev);
> +	struct rtc_class_ops *ops = rtc->ops;
> +
> +	/* We keep the lock as long as the device is in use
> +	 * and return immediately if busy
> +	 */
> +	if (down_trylock(&rtc->char_sem))
> +		return -EBUSY;
> +

Does the device have to be opened for exclusively? Can it support
concurrent reads?


> +	file->private_data = &rtc->class_dev;
> +
> +	err = ops->open ? ops->open(rtc->class_dev.dev) : 0;
> +	if (err == 0) {
> +
> +		spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +		rtc->irq_data = 0;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* something has gone wrong, release the lock */
> +	up(&rtc->char_sem);
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +rtc_dev_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +
> +	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
> +	unsigned long data;
> +	ssize_t ret;
> +
> +	if (count < sizeof(unsigned long))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	add_wait_queue(&rtc->irq_queue, &wait);
> +	do {
> +		__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> +
> +		spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +		data = rtc->irq_data;
> +		rtc->irq_data = 0;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> +		if (data != 0) {
> +			ret = 0;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) {
> +			ret = -EAGAIN;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		if (signal_pending(current)) {
> +			ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		schedule();
> +	} while (1);
> +	set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> +	remove_wait_queue(&rtc->irq_queue, &wait);
> +


The above looks very much like open-coded wait_event_interruptible();

> +	if (ret == 0) {
> +		ret = put_user(data, (unsigned long __user *)buf);
> +		if (ret == 0)
> +			ret = sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	}
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int rtc_dev_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +	unsigned long data;
> +
> +	poll_wait(file, &rtc->irq_queue, wait);
> +
> +	spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +	data = rtc->irq_data;
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> +	return data != 0 ? POLLIN | POLLRDNORM : 0;
> +}

What does the lock above protect? Once it is released rtc->irq_data may
change so reader that was woken up may not see any data anyway.

> +static int rtc_dev_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> +		     unsigned long arg)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +	struct class_device *class_dev = file->private_data;
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> +	struct rtc_class_ops *ops = rtc->ops;
> +	struct rtc_time tm;
> +	struct rtc_wkalrm alarm;
> +	void __user *uarg = (void __user *) arg;
> +
> +	/* avoid conflicting IRQ users */
> +	if (cmd == RTC_PIE_ON || cmd == RTC_PIE_OFF || cmd == RTC_IRQP_SET) {
> +		spin_lock(&rtc->irq_task_lock);
> +		if (rtc->irq_task)
> +			err = -EBUSY;
> +		spin_unlock(&rtc->irq_task_lock);
> +
> +		if (err < 0)
> +			return err;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* try the driver's ioctl interface */
> +	if (ops->ioctl) {
> +		err = ops->ioctl(class_dev->dev, cmd, arg);
> +		if (err < 0 && err != -EINVAL)
> +			return err;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* if the driver does not provide the ioctl interface
> +	 * or if that particular ioctl was not implemented
> +	 * (-EINVAL), we will try to emulate here.
> +	 */
> +
> +	switch (cmd) {
> +	case RTC_ALM_READ:
> +		if ((err = rtc_read_alarm(class_dev, &alarm)) < 0)
> +			return err;
> +
> +		if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &alarm.time, sizeof(tm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RTC_ALM_SET:
> +		if ((err = copy_from_user(&alarm.time, uarg, sizeof(tm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +
> +		alarm.enabled = 0;
> +		alarm.pending = 0;
> +		alarm.time.tm_mday = -1;
> +		alarm.time.tm_mon = -1;
> +		alarm.time.tm_year = -1;
> +		alarm.time.tm_wday = -1;
> +		alarm.time.tm_yday = -1;
> +		alarm.time.tm_isdst = -1;
> +		err = rtc_set_alarm(class_dev, &alarm);
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RTC_RD_TIME:
> +		if ((err = rtc_read_time(class_dev, &tm)) < 0)
> +			return err;
> +
> +		if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &tm, sizeof(tm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RTC_SET_TIME:
> +		if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME))
> +			return -EACCES;
> +
> +		if ((err = copy_from_user(&tm, uarg, sizeof(tm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +
> +		err = rtc_set_time(class_dev, &tm);
> +		break;
> +#if 0
> +	case RTC_EPOCH_SET:
> +#ifndef rtc_epoch
> +		/*
> +		 * There were no RTC clocks before 1900.
> +		 */
> +		if (arg < 1900) {
> +			err = -EINVAL;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME)) {
> +			err = -EACCES;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		rtc_epoch = arg;
> +		err = 0;
> +#endif
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RTC_EPOCH_READ:
> +		err = put_user(rtc_epoch, (unsigned long __user *)uarg);
> +		break;
> +#endif
> +	case RTC_WKALM_SET:
> +		if ((err = copy_from_user(&alarm, uarg, sizeof(alarm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +
> +		err = rtc_set_alarm(class_dev, &alarm);
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RTC_WKALM_RD:
> +		if ((err = rtc_read_alarm(class_dev, &alarm)) < 0)
> +			return err;
> +
> +		if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &alarm, sizeof(alarm))))
> +			return -EFAULT;
> +		break;
> +
> +	default:
> +		err = -EINVAL;
> +		break;
> +	}
> +
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +
> +	if (rtc->ops->release)
> +		rtc->ops->release(rtc->class_dev.dev);
> +
> +	spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +	rtc->irq_data = 0;
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +

Why is the above needed?

> +	up(&rtc->char_sem);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_fasync(int fd, struct file *file, int on)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +	return fasync_helper(fd, file, on, &rtc->async_queue);
> +}
> +
> +static struct file_operations rtc_dev_fops = {
> +	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
> +	.llseek		= no_llseek,
> +	.read		= rtc_dev_read,
> +	.poll		= rtc_dev_poll,
> +	.ioctl		= rtc_dev_ioctl,
> +	.open		= rtc_dev_open,
> +	.release	= rtc_dev_release,
> +	.fasync		= rtc_dev_fasync,
> +};
> +
> +static ssize_t rtc_dev_show_dev(struct class_device *class_dev, char *buf)
> +{
> +        return print_dev_t(buf, class_dev->devt);
> +}
> +static CLASS_DEVICE_ATTR(dev, S_IRUGO, rtc_dev_show_dev, NULL);
> +
> +/* insertion/removal hooks */
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_add_device(struct class_device *class_dev,
> +				struct class_interface *class_intf)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> +
> +	if (rtc->id >= RTC_DEV_MAX) {
> +		dev_err(class_dev->dev, "too many RTCs\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	init_MUTEX(&rtc->char_sem);
> +	spin_lock_init(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +	init_waitqueue_head(&rtc->irq_queue);
> +
> +	cdev_init(&rtc->char_dev, &rtc_dev_fops);
> +	rtc->char_dev.owner = rtc->owner;
> +	class_dev->devt = MKDEV(MAJOR(rtc_devt), rtc->id);
> +
> +	if (cdev_add(&rtc->char_dev, class_dev->devt, 1)) {
> +		cdev_del(&rtc->char_dev);
> +
> +		dev_err(class_dev->dev,
> +			"failed to add char device %d:%d\n",
> +			MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> +			MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> +
> +		class_dev->devt = MKDEV(0, 0);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	class_device_create_file(class_dev, &class_device_attr_dev);
> +
> +	dev_info(class_dev->dev, "rtc intf: dev (%d:%d)\n",
> +		MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> +		MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> +
> +	kobject_hotplug(&class_dev->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
> +

This is kobject_hotplug abuse; you are not adding a new object here.

> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void rtc_dev_remove_device(struct class_device *class_dev,
> +					struct class_interface *class_intf)
> +{
> +	struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> +
> +	class_device_remove_file(class_dev, &class_device_attr_dev);
> +
> +	if (MAJOR(class_dev->devt)) {
> +		dev_dbg(class_dev->dev, "removing char %d:%d\n",
> +			MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> +			MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> +		cdev_del(&rtc->char_dev);
> +
> +		kobject_hotplug(&class_dev->kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
> +

Same here...

> +		class_dev->devt = MKDEV(0, 0);
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +/* interface registration */
> +
> +struct class_interface rtc_dev_interface = {
> +	.add = &rtc_dev_add_device,
> +	.remove = &rtc_dev_remove_device,
> +};
> +

I wonder if doing rtc dev as a class device interface is a good idea.
It may be cleaner to fold it into the core.

> +static int __init rtc_dev_init(void)
> +{
> +	int err;
> +
> +	if ((err = alloc_chrdev_region(&rtc_devt, 0, RTC_DEV_MAX, "rtc")) < 0) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: failed to allocate char dev region\n",
> +			__FILE__);
> +		return err;
> +	}
> +
> +	if ((err = rtc_interface_register(&rtc_dev_interface)) < 0) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: failed to register the interface\n",
> +			__FILE__);
> +		unregister_chrdev_region(rtc_devt, RTC_DEV_MAX);
> +		return err;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit rtc_dev_exit(void)
> +{
> +	class_interface_unregister(&rtc_dev_interface);
> +
> +	unregister_chrdev_region(rtc_devt, RTC_DEV_MAX);
> +}
> +
> +module_init(rtc_dev_init);
> +module_exit(rtc_dev_exit);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("RTC class dev interface");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> --- linux-nslu2.orig/drivers/rtc/Kconfig	2006-01-04 01:27:14.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-nslu2/drivers/rtc/Kconfig	2006-01-04 01:27:15.000000000 +0100
> @@ -41,6 +41,17 @@ config RTC_INTF_PROC
>  	  This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
>  	  will be called rtc-proc.
>  
> +config RTC_INTF_DEV
> +	tristate "dev"
> +	depends on RTC_CLASS
> +	default RTC_CLASS
> +	help
> +	  Say yes here if you want to use your RTC using the dev
> +	  interface, /dev/rtc .
> +
> +	  This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
> +	  will be called rtc-dev.
> +
>  comment "RTC drivers"
>  	depends on RTC_CLASS
>  
> --- linux-nslu2.orig/drivers/rtc/Makefile	2006-01-04 01:27:14.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-nslu2/drivers/rtc/Makefile	2006-01-04 01:27:15.000000000 +0100
> @@ -7,3 +7,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_CLASS)		+= rtc-core.o
>  rtc-core-y			:= class.o interface.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_SYSFS)	+= rtc-sysfs.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_PROC)	+= rtc-proc.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_DEV)	+= rtc-dev.o
> 
> --
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

-- 
Dmitry

  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-09  2:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-08 23:12 [PATCH 0/8] RTC subsystem Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 1/8] RTC subsystem, class Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 2/8] RTC subsystem, ARM cleanup Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 3/8] RTC subsystem, sysfs interface Alessandro Zummo
     [not found]   ` <200601082102.40992.dtor_core@ameritech.net>
2006-01-09  2:13     ` Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 4/8] RTC subsystem, proc interface Alessandro Zummo
     [not found]   ` <200601082056.30227.dtor_core@ameritech.net>
2006-01-09  2:04     ` Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-09  2:50       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 5/8] RTC subsystem, dev interface Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-09  2:50   ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message]
2006-01-09  3:12     ` Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-09  6:39       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-09  9:14         ` Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 6/8] RTC subsystem, X1205 driver Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 7/8] RTC subsystem, test device/driver Alessandro Zummo
2006-01-08 23:12 ` [PATCH 8/8] RTC subsystem, DS1672 driver Alessandro Zummo

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=200601082150.22213.dtor_core@ameritech.net \
    --to=dtor_core@ameritech.net \
    --cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.