From: "Nuno Sá" <noname.nuno@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@gmail.com>,
Jagath Jog J <jagathjog1996@gmail.com>,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org>,
Daniel Campello <campello@chromium.org>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] iio: locking: introduce __cleanup() based direct mode claiming infrastructure
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:51:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0147cfed5e8402722186daa49256d20a8e2c83a1.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231023105323.00000370@Huawei.com>
On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 10:53 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 10:55:56 +0200
> Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2023-10-22 at 16:10 -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > > >
> > > > Allows use of:
> > > >
> > > > CLASS(iio_claim_direct, claimed_dev)(indio_dev);
> > > > if (IS_ERR(claimed_dev))
> > > > return PTR_ERR(claimed_dev);
> > > >
> > > > st = iio_priv(claimed_dev);
> > > >
> > > > to automatically call iio_device_release_direct_mode() based on scope.
> > > > Typically seen in combination with local device specific locks which
> > > > are already have automated cleanup options via guard(mutex)(&st->lock)
> > > > and scoped_guard(). Using both together allows most error handling to
> > > > be automated.
> > > >
> > > > Note that whilst this pattern results in a struct iio_dev *claimed_dev
> > > > that can be used, it is not necessary to do so as long as that pointer
> > > > has been checked for errors as in the example.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c | 4 ++++
> > > > include/linux/iio/iio.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-
> > > > core.c
> > > > index c77745b594bd..93bfad105eb5 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> > > > @@ -2065,6 +2065,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iio_device_claim_direct_mode);
> > > > */
> > > > void iio_device_release_direct_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > > > {
> > > > + /* Auto cleanup can result in this being called with an ERR_PTR
> > > > */
> > > > + if (IS_ERR(indio_dev))
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > mutex_unlock(&to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev)->mlock);
> > > > }
> > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iio_device_release_direct_mode);
> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/iio/iio.h b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> > > > index d0ce3b71106a..11c42170fda1 100644
> > > > --- a/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> > > > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #include <linux/device.h>
> > > > #include <linux/cdev.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
> > > > #include <linux/slab.h>
> > > > #include <linux/iio/types.h>
> > > > /* IIO TODO LIST */
> > > > @@ -644,6 +645,30 @@ int __devm_iio_device_register(struct device *dev,
> > > > struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > > int iio_push_event(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u64 ev_code, s64
> > > > timestamp);
> > > > int iio_device_claim_direct_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> > > > void iio_device_release_direct_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * Auto cleanup version of iio_device_claim_direct_mode,
> > > > + *
> > > > + * CLASS(iio_claim_direct, claimed_dev)(indio_dev);
> > > > + * if (IS_ERR(claimed_dev))
> > > > + * return PTR_ERR(claimed_dev);
> > > > + *
> > > > + * st = iio_priv(claimed_dev);
> > > > + * ....
> > > > + */
> > > > +DEFINE_CLASS(iio_claim_direct, struct iio_dev *,
> > > > + iio_device_release_direct_mode(_T),
> > > > + ({
> > > > + struct iio_dev *dev;
> > > > + int d = iio_device_claim_direct_mode(_T);
> > > > +
> > > > + if (d < 0)
> > > > + dev = ERR_PTR(d);
> > > > + else
> > > > + dev = _T;
> > > > + dev;
> > > > + }),
> > > > + struct iio_dev *_T);
> > > > +
> > > > int iio_device_claim_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> > > > void iio_device_release_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.42.0
> > > >
> > >
> > > What is the benefit of exposing `claimed_dev` rather than just the int
> > > return value? It seems like it just makes more noise in the error
> > > check.
> > >
> >
> > I don't really have a very strong opinion on this but what I really don't
> > like
> > much is the pattern:
> >
> > CLASS(type, ret), where the return value is an argument of the macro... It
> > would
> > be nice if we could just make it like:
> >
> > ret = guard(type)(...); //or any other variation of the guard() macro
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > the above could also be an error pointer or even have one variation of each.
> > but
> > yeah, that likely means changing the cleanup.h file and that might be out of
> > scope for Jonathan's patch series.
> >
>
> I fully agree it's ugly and a little unintuitive but I don't see a way an
> "lvalue"
> can work work cleanly (due to magic types under the hood) and I suspect we
> will
> have to get used to this pattern.
>
Yeah, given the games being played with the constructor and the _lock definition
so we return the variable we want to "release" I agree it would be hard to have
anything clean and likely even harder to read (more than it is already :)).
However, I think users of the cleanup.h stuff could build on top of it... For
instance, in our case we could have something like:
#define IIO_CLAIM_DIRECT(dev)
int __ret = 0;
CLASS(iio_claim_direct, claimed_dev)(dev);
if ((IS_ERR(claimed_dev))
__ret = PTR_ERR(claimed_dev);
__ret
Then we could use it in the same way as before... Or at the very least I would
simply make it a bit more readable for IIO (rather than the plain CLASS() call):
#define IIO_CLAIM_DIRECT(claimed_dev, dev)
CLASS(iio_claim_direct, claimed_dev)(dev)
Just some thoughts...
- Nuno Sá
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-22 15:47 [RFC PATCH 0/8] IIO: Use the new cleanup.h magic Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] iio: locking: introduce __cleanup() based direct mode claiming infrastructure Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 21:10 ` David Lechner
2023-10-23 8:55 ` Nuno Sá
2023-10-23 9:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-23 11:51 ` Nuno Sá [this message]
2023-10-23 14:34 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-23 14:58 ` Nuno Sá
2023-10-24 12:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-25 7:24 ` Nuno Sá
2023-10-24 15:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-24 15:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-28 16:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-11-02 10:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-11-03 15:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-23 9:49 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] iio: dummy: Add use of new automated cleanup of locks and direct mode claiming Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] iio: accel: adxl367: Use automated cleanup for locks and iio direct mode Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] iio: imu: bmi323: Use cleanup handling for iio_device_claim_direct_mode() Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] iio: adc: max1363: Use automatic cleanup for locks and iio mode claiming Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] iio: proximity: sx9360: Use automated cleanup for locks and IIO " Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] iio: proximity: sx9324: " Jonathan Cameron
2023-10-22 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] iio: proximity: sx9310: " Jonathan Cameron
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=0147cfed5e8402722186daa49256d20a8e2c83a1.camel@gmail.com \
--to=noname.nuno@gmail.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com \
--cc=campello@chromium.org \
--cc=demonsingur@gmail.com \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gwendal@chromium.org \
--cc=jagathjog1996@gmail.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox