Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] iio: core: Add cleanup.h support for iio_device_claim_*()

["Kurt Borja" <kuurtb@gmail.com>]

On Sun Jan 18, 2026 at 2:35 PM -05, David Lechner wrote:
> On 1/18/26 9:44 AM, Kurt Borja wrote:
>> Add guard classes for iio_device_claim_*() conditional locks. This will
>> aid drivers write safer and cleaner code when dealing with some common
>> patterns.
>> 
>> These classes are not meant to be used directly by drivers (hence the
>> __priv__ prefix). Instead, documented wrapper macros are provided to
>> enforce the use of ACQUIRE() or guard() semantics and avoid the
>> problematic scoped guard.
>> 
>> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/iio/iio.h | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/include/linux/iio/iio.h b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
>> index fa671e120e95..4a0a77fcfa8d 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/iio/iio.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/align.h>
>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>  #include <linux/cdev.h>
>> +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
>>  #include <linux/compiler_types.h>
>>  #include <linux/minmax.h>
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>> @@ -740,6 +741,70 @@ static inline bool iio_device_try_claim_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
>>   */
>>  #define iio_device_release_buffer_mode(indio_dev) __iio_dev_mode_unlock(indio_dev)
>>  
>> +/*
>> + * These classes are not meant to be used directly by drivers (hence the
>> + * __priv__ prefix). Instead, documented wrapper macros are provided below to
>> + * enforce the use of ACQUIRE() or guard() semantics and avoid the problematic
>> + * scoped guard variants.
>> + */
>> +DEFINE_GUARD(__priv__iio_dev_mode_lock, struct iio_dev *,
>> +	     __iio_dev_mode_lock(_T), __iio_dev_mode_unlock(_T));
>> +DEFINE_GUARD_COND(__priv__iio_dev_mode_lock, _try_direct,
>> +		  iio_device_claim_direct(_T));
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_DIRECT_MODE(dev, var) - Tries to acquire the direct mode
>> + *					   lock with automatic release
>
> Should be just IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_DIRECT_MODE()
>
>> + * @dev: IIO device instance
>> + * @claim: Variable identifier to store acquire result
>> + *
>> + * Tries to acquire the direct mode lock with cleanup ACQUIRE() semantics and
>> + * automatically releases it at the end of the scope. It most be always paired
>> + * with IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_ERR(), for example (notice the scope braces)::
>> + *
>> + *	switch() {
>> + *	case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW: {
>> + *		IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_DIRECT_MODE(indio_dev, claim);
>> + *		if (IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_FAILED(claim))
>> + *			return -EBUSY;
>> + *
>> + *		...
>> + *	}
>> + *	case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE:
>> + *		...
>> + *	...
>> + *	}
>> + *
>> + * Context: Can sleep
>> + */
>> +#define IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_DIRECT_MODE(dev, claim) \
>> +	ACQUIRE(__priv__iio_dev_mode_lock_try_direct, claim)(dev)
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_FAILED() - ACQUIRE_ERR() wrapper
>
> This one is correct style.
>
>> + * @claim: The claim variable passed to IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_*_MODE()
>> + *
>> + * Return: true if failed to acquire the mode, otherwise false.
>> + */
>> +#define IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_FAILED(claim) \
>> +	ACQUIRE_ERR(__priv__iio_dev_mode_lock_try_direct, &(claim))
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * IIO_DEV_GUARD_CURRENT_MODE - Acquires the mode lock with automatic release
>
> Missing ()

Hi David,

I didn't see what you meant in the previous email. Sorry! I'll correct
it.

-- 
Thanks,
 ~ Kurt