From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6254945718130180096 X-Received: by 10.140.40.239 with SMTP id x102mr33314597qgx.23.1456825238530; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 01:40:38 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.91.23 with SMTP id y23ls3596153qgd.35.gmail; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 01:40:37 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.13.232.195 with SMTP id r186mr16031663ywe.30.1456825237685; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 01:40:37 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com. [134.134.136.65]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id yd9si4184770pab.1.2016.03.01.01.40.37 for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 01:40:37 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of daniel.baluta@intel.com designates 134.134.136.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=134.134.136.65; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of daniel.baluta@intel.com designates 134.134.136.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=daniel.baluta@intel.com Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2016 01:40:37 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,522,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="57473065" Received: from dbaluta.rb.intel.com (HELO [10.237.104.86]) ([10.237.104.86]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2016 01:40:34 -0800 Subject: Re: IIO Coding Task 2 ? To: Alison Schofield References: <20160224194352.GA3122@d830.WORKGROUP> <56CEB5B4.5060605@intel.com> <56CEC19C.1010300@intel.com> <20160225182612.GA2359@d830.WORKGROUP> <20160301034750.GA2401@d830.WORKGROUP> Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com From: Daniel Baluta Message-ID: <56D56438.8000607@intel.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:43:20 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160301034750.GA2401@d830.WORKGROUP> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01.03.2016 05:47, Alison Schofield wrote: > .........................snip................... >> t > >We will make this in two steps: >>>> * introduce API >>>> * find a place where locking is not done >>>> * use new API >>>> >>>> After IIO maintainer says this is OK: >>>> * update all places with the new API. >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> Daniel. >> Thanks for the directon. I am working on that first step. >> alisons > Hi Daniel, > I'm ready to send out the RFC PATCH, but I wasn't able to meet > one of your requests. I did not find a place where the locking > was not done. The 'sample' is one where mlock was used with > iio_buffer_enabled. I think it illustrates the API well because > it clearly shows the before/after that would occur in other drivers. > Send it? > Thanks, > alisons > Yes please :). Send the patches as RFC's, don't forget to Cc linux-iio mailing list. Also, you can expand your searches to drivers/iio/. thanks, Daniel.