All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Harald Geyer <harald@ccbib.org>
Cc: jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de,
	pmeerw@pmeerw.net, sanjeev_sharma@mentor.com,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 18:58:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <547DFDD8.1010404@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1XvmLC-0001BT-F3@stardust.g4.wien.funkfeuer.at>

Harald,

Am 02.12.2014 um 13:14 schrieb Harald Geyer:
>>> Move the locking out of the if statement.
>>
>> Care to explain why?
> 
> The purpose of the if statement is to limit the number of data
> transmissions if values are requested multiple times in short
> succession. (Ie an application reading both sensor values.)
> 
> If we have concurrent reads, then the later one will wait in the
> mutex_lock() while the former will update the timestamp. If the
> later one resumes, it won't check the timestamp and cause an
> unnecessary data transmission.

Okay, makes sense.
I'll update my patch!

>  
>> But I found another issue in my patch.
>> The "dht11->num_edges = -1;" before "return ret" needs to go into the locked area.
>> Will send an updated version soon.
>>
>>> BTW, it seems that there is already locking around read_raw() in the
>>> in-kernel consumer interface but not in the sysfs interface. Is there
>>> any reason for this difference?
>>
>> Dunno. :-)
> 
> If locking is actually necessary, then this would be a bug in the
> current version of the driver, which wasn't caught by at least three
> people doing reviews, so maybe let's find out if it really is necessary
> or if I'm missing something ...

Maybe IIO folks can tell us more.
What I see in other IIO drivers is that they all have locking in the read functions
and so far I see no global serialization in IIO itself.

Thanks,
//richard

      reply	other threads:[~2014-12-02 17:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-01 20:27 [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking Richard Weinberger
2014-12-01 20:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] iio: dht11: IRQ fixes Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 10:19   ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 10:54     ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 12:58       ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 18:12         ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 19:49           ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 20:39             ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-03 20:14           ` Hartmut Knaack
2014-12-02 10:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 10:52   ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 12:14     ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 17:58       ` Richard Weinberger [this message]

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=547DFDD8.1010404@nod.at \
    --to=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=harald@ccbib.org \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
    --cc=sanjeev_sharma@mentor.com \
    /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.