[PATCH 0/2] ADC: Fix bugs related to oneshot read

[PATCH 0/2] ADC: Fix bugs related to oneshot read

[Vignesh R]

This series fixes a couple of bugs related to simultaneous read of
multiple ADC channels in oneshot mode. Since, all channels share FIFO1,
it has to be protected using a mutex, implemented by patch 1. Patch 2
increases the timeout waiting for a ADC sample.

Vignesh R (2):
  iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access
  iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Increase timeout value waiting for ADC sample

 drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c      | 16 ++++++++++++----
 include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h |  8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
2.9.2

[PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access

[Vignesh R]

It is possible that two or more ADC channels can be simultaneously
requested for raw samples, in which case there can be race in access to
FIFO data resulting in loss of samples.
If am335x_tsc_se_set_once() is called again from tiadc_read_raw(), when
ADC is still acquired to sample one of the channels, the second process
might be put into uninterruptible sleep state. Fix these issues, by
protecting FIFO access and channel configurations with a mutex. Since
tiadc_read_raw() might take anywhere between few microseconds to few
milliseconds to finish execution (depending on averaging and delay
values supplied via DT), its better to use mutex instead of spinlock.

Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
---
 drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c | 14 +++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
index 8a368756881b..bed9977a1863 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
 
 struct tiadc_device {
 	struct ti_tscadc_dev *mfd_tscadc;
+	struct mutex fifo1_lock; /* to protect fifo access */
 	int channels;
 	u8 channel_line[8];
 	u8 channel_step[8];
@@ -359,6 +360,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 		int *val, int *val2, long mask)
 {
 	struct tiadc_device *adc_dev = iio_priv(indio_dev);
+	int ret = IIO_VAL_INT;
 	int i, map_val;
 	unsigned int fifo1count, read, stepid;
 	bool found = false;
@@ -372,6 +374,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 	if (!step_en)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	mutex_lock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
 	fifo1count = tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1CNT);
 	while (fifo1count--)
 		tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1);
@@ -388,7 +391,8 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 
 		if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) {
 			am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
-			return -EAGAIN;
+			ret = -EAGAIN;
+			goto err_unlock;
 		}
 	}
 	map_val = adc_dev->channel_step[chan->scan_index];
@@ -414,8 +418,11 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 	am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
 
 	if (found == false)
-		return -EBUSY;
-	return IIO_VAL_INT;
+		ret =  -EBUSY;
+
+err_unlock:
+	mutex_unlock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
+	return ret;
 }
 
 static const struct iio_info tiadc_info = {
@@ -483,6 +490,7 @@ static int tiadc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	tiadc_step_config(indio_dev);
 	tiadc_writel(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1THR, FIFO1_THRESHOLD);
+	mutex_init(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
 
 	err = tiadc_channel_init(indio_dev, adc_dev->channels);
 	if (err < 0)
-- 
2.9.2

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access

[Matt Ranostay]

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 4:05 AM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
> It is possible that two or more ADC channels can be simultaneously
> requested for raw samples, in which case there can be race in access to
> FIFO data resulting in loss of samples.
> If am335x_tsc_se_set_once() is called again from tiadc_read_raw(), when
> ADC is still acquired to sample one of the channels, the second process
> might be put into uninterruptible sleep state. Fix these issues, by
> protecting FIFO access and channel configurations with a mutex. Since
> tiadc_read_raw() might take anywhere between few microseconds to few
> milliseconds to finish execution (depending on averaging and delay
> values supplied via DT), its better to use mutex instead of spinlock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> index 8a368756881b..bed9977a1863 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>
>  struct tiadc_device {
>         struct ti_tscadc_dev *mfd_tscadc;
> +       struct mutex fifo1_lock; /* to protect fifo access */

Are there more than one FIFOs, or even possible? Just wondering the
number indexing here..

>         int channels;
>         u8 channel_line[8];
>         u8 channel_step[8];
> @@ -359,6 +360,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>                 int *val, int *val2, long mask)
>  {
>         struct tiadc_device *adc_dev = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +       int ret = IIO_VAL_INT;
>         int i, map_val;
>         unsigned int fifo1count, read, stepid;
>         bool found = false;
> @@ -372,6 +374,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>         if (!step_en)
>                 return -EINVAL;
>
> +       mutex_lock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
>         fifo1count = tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1CNT);
>         while (fifo1count--)
>                 tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1);
> @@ -388,7 +391,8 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>
>                 if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) {
>                         am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
> -                       return -EAGAIN;
> +                       ret = -EAGAIN;
> +                       goto err_unlock;
>                 }
>         }
>         map_val = adc_dev->channel_step[chan->scan_index];
> @@ -414,8 +418,11 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>         am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
>
>         if (found == false)
> -               return -EBUSY;
> -       return IIO_VAL_INT;
> +               ret =  -EBUSY;
> +
> +err_unlock:
> +       mutex_unlock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
> +       return ret;
>  }
>
>  static const struct iio_info tiadc_info = {
> @@ -483,6 +490,7 @@ static int tiadc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>         tiadc_step_config(indio_dev);
>         tiadc_writel(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1THR, FIFO1_THRESHOLD);
> +       mutex_init(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
>
>         err = tiadc_channel_init(indio_dev, adc_dev->channels);
>         if (err < 0)
> --
> 2.9.2
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access

[Vignesh R]

On Tuesday 09 August 2016 03:21 PM, Matt Ranostay wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 4:05 AM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
>> It is possible that two or more ADC channels can be simultaneously
>> requested for raw samples, in which case there can be race in access to
>> FIFO data resulting in loss of samples.
>> If am335x_tsc_se_set_once() is called again from tiadc_read_raw(), when
>> ADC is still acquired to sample one of the channels, the second process
>> might be put into uninterruptible sleep state. Fix these issues, by
>> protecting FIFO access and channel configurations with a mutex. Since
>> tiadc_read_raw() might take anywhere between few microseconds to few
>> milliseconds to finish execution (depending on averaging and delay
>> values supplied via DT), its better to use mutex instead of spinlock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
>> index 8a368756881b..bed9977a1863 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>>
>>  struct tiadc_device {
>>         struct ti_tscadc_dev *mfd_tscadc;
>> +       struct mutex fifo1_lock; /* to protect fifo access */
> 
> Are there more than one FIFOs, or even possible? Just wondering the
> number indexing here..

ADC IP as such as two FIFOs: FIFO0 and FIFO1. FIFO0 is dedicated for
touchscreen channels and FIFO1 is used for ADC channels. Its not
possible to use FIFO0 for ADC, but to match h/w register naming, I used
above name for mutex.

-- 
Regards
Vignesh

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 08/08/16 12:05, Vignesh R wrote:
> It is possible that two or more ADC channels can be simultaneously
> requested for raw samples, in which case there can be race in access to
> FIFO data resulting in loss of samples.
> If am335x_tsc_se_set_once() is called again from tiadc_read_raw(), when
> ADC is still acquired to sample one of the channels, the second process
> might be put into uninterruptible sleep state. Fix these issues, by
> protecting FIFO access and channel configurations with a mutex. Since
> tiadc_read_raw() might take anywhere between few microseconds to few
> milliseconds to finish execution (depending on averaging and delay
> values supplied via DT), its better to use mutex instead of spinlock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
Hi,

Thanks for the patch.

As this is clearly a fix for a long standing issue, I'd like to send
it for stable inclusion.  Would you mind doing a bit of detective work
to added a Fixes tag to say which original patch introduced the issue?

I'm going to start pushing back on this in general as it's helpful
to the stable maintainers if we provide this info whenever possible.

Thanks,

Jonathan
> ---
>  drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> index 8a368756881b..bed9977a1863 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>  
>  struct tiadc_device {
>  	struct ti_tscadc_dev *mfd_tscadc;
> +	struct mutex fifo1_lock; /* to protect fifo access */
>  	int channels;
>  	u8 channel_line[8];
>  	u8 channel_step[8];
> @@ -359,6 +360,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  		int *val, int *val2, long mask)
>  {
>  	struct tiadc_device *adc_dev = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +	int ret = IIO_VAL_INT;
>  	int i, map_val;
>  	unsigned int fifo1count, read, stepid;
>  	bool found = false;
> @@ -372,6 +374,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  	if (!step_en)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	mutex_lock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
>  	fifo1count = tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1CNT);
>  	while (fifo1count--)
>  		tiadc_readl(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1);
> @@ -388,7 +391,8 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  
>  		if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) {
>  			am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
> -			return -EAGAIN;
> +			ret = -EAGAIN;
> +			goto err_unlock;
>  		}
>  	}
>  	map_val = adc_dev->channel_step[chan->scan_index];
> @@ -414,8 +418,11 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  	am335x_tsc_se_adc_done(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc);
>  
>  	if (found == false)
> -		return -EBUSY;
> -	return IIO_VAL_INT;
> +		ret =  -EBUSY;
> +
> +err_unlock:
> +	mutex_unlock(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  static const struct iio_info tiadc_info = {
> @@ -483,6 +490,7 @@ static int tiadc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	tiadc_step_config(indio_dev);
>  	tiadc_writel(adc_dev, REG_FIFO1THR, FIFO1_THRESHOLD);
> +	mutex_init(&adc_dev->fifo1_lock);
>  
>  	err = tiadc_channel_init(indio_dev, adc_dev->channels);
>  	if (err < 0)
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Protect FIFO1 from concurrent access

[Vignesh R]

On Monday 15 August 2016 09:15 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 08/08/16 12:05, Vignesh R wrote:
>> It is possible that two or more ADC channels can be simultaneously
>> requested for raw samples, in which case there can be race in access to
>> FIFO data resulting in loss of samples.
>> If am335x_tsc_se_set_once() is called again from tiadc_read_raw(), when
>> ADC is still acquired to sample one of the channels, the second process
>> might be put into uninterruptible sleep state. Fix these issues, by
>> protecting FIFO access and channel configurations with a mutex. Since
>> tiadc_read_raw() might take anywhere between few microseconds to few
>> milliseconds to finish execution (depending on averaging and delay
>> values supplied via DT), its better to use mutex instead of spinlock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for the patch.
> 
> As this is clearly a fix for a long standing issue, I'd like to send
> it for stable inclusion.  Would you mind doing a bit of detective work
> to added a Fixes tag to say which original patch introduced the issue?
> 

Looks to be due to the commit 7ca6740cd1cd4 ("mfd: input: iio:
ti_amm335x: Rework TSC/ADC synchronization")
Will send v2 with fixes tag. Thanks!

-- 
Regards
Vignesh

[PATCH 2/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Increase timeout value waiting for ADC sample

[Vignesh R]

Now that open delay and sample delay for each channel is configurable
via DT, the default IDLE_TIMEOUT value is not enough as this is
calculated based on hardcoded macros. This results in driver returning
EBUSY sometimes. Fix this by increasing the timeout
value based on maximum value possible to open delay and sample delays
for each channel.

Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
---
 drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c      | 2 +-
 include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h | 8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
index bed9977a1863..c3cfacca2541 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
@@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
 
 	am335x_tsc_se_set_once(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc, step_en);
 
-	timeout = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies
+	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies
 				(IDLE_TIMEOUT * adc_dev->channels);
 	/* Wait for Fifo threshold interrupt */
 	while (1) {
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
index 2567a87872b0..7f55b8b41032 100644
--- a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
@@ -138,16 +138,16 @@
 /*
  * time in us for processing a single channel, calculated as follows:
  *
- * num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
+ * max num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
  *
- * num cycles: 152 + (1 + 13) * 16 = 376
+ * max num cycles: 262143 + (255 + 13) * 16 = 266431
  *
  * clock frequency: 26MHz / 8 = 3.25MHz
  * clock period: 1 / 3.25MHz = 308ns
  *
- * processing time: 376 * 308ns = 116us
+ * max processing time: 266431 * 308ns = 83ms(approx)
  */
-#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 116 /* microsec */
+#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 83 /* milliseconds */
 
 #define TSCADC_CELLS		2
 
-- 
2.9.2

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Increase timeout value waiting for ADC sample

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016, Vignesh R wrote:

> Now that open delay and sample delay for each channel is configurable
> via DT, the default IDLE_TIMEOUT value is not enough as this is
> calculated based on hardcoded macros. This results in driver returning
> EBUSY sometimes. Fix this by increasing the timeout
> value based on maximum value possible to open delay and sample delays
> for each channel.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c      | 2 +-
>  include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h | 8 ++++----

Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> index bed9977a1863..c3cfacca2541 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  
>  	am335x_tsc_se_set_once(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc, step_en);
>  
> -	timeout = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies
> +	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies
>  				(IDLE_TIMEOUT * adc_dev->channels);
>  	/* Wait for Fifo threshold interrupt */
>  	while (1) {
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> index 2567a87872b0..7f55b8b41032 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> @@ -138,16 +138,16 @@
>  /*
>   * time in us for processing a single channel, calculated as follows:
>   *
> - * num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
> + * max num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
>   *
> - * num cycles: 152 + (1 + 13) * 16 = 376
> + * max num cycles: 262143 + (255 + 13) * 16 = 266431
>   *
>   * clock frequency: 26MHz / 8 = 3.25MHz
>   * clock period: 1 / 3.25MHz = 308ns
>   *
> - * processing time: 376 * 308ns = 116us
> + * max processing time: 266431 * 308ns = 83ms(approx)
>   */
> -#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 116 /* microsec */
> +#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 83 /* milliseconds */
>  
>  #define TSCADC_CELLS		2
>  

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Increase timeout value waiting for ADC sample

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 08/08/16 12:05, Vignesh R wrote:
> Now that open delay and sample delay for each channel is configurable
> via DT, the default IDLE_TIMEOUT value is not enough as this is
> calculated based on hardcoded macros. This results in driver returning
> EBUSY sometimes. Fix this by increasing the timeout
> value based on maximum value possible to open delay and sample delays
> for each channel.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
As with patch 1 could you provide a fixes tag as well highlighting the
patch that introduced the issue. I'm thinking you are referring to:

iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: make sample delay, open delay, averaging DT parameters
5dc11e810676ec4a5acb4423ccd33314bf74f4e54

> ---
>  drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c      | 2 +-
>  include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h | 8 ++++----
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> index bed9977a1863..c3cfacca2541 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti_am335x_adc.c
> @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static int tiadc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  
>  	am335x_tsc_se_set_once(adc_dev->mfd_tscadc, step_en);
>  
> -	timeout = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies
> +	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies
>  				(IDLE_TIMEOUT * adc_dev->channels);
>  	/* Wait for Fifo threshold interrupt */
>  	while (1) {
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> index 2567a87872b0..7f55b8b41032 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/ti_am335x_tscadc.h
> @@ -138,16 +138,16 @@
>  /*
>   * time in us for processing a single channel, calculated as follows:
>   *
> - * num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
> + * max num cycles = open delay + (sample delay + conv time) * averaging
>   *
> - * num cycles: 152 + (1 + 13) * 16 = 376
> + * max num cycles: 262143 + (255 + 13) * 16 = 266431
>   *
>   * clock frequency: 26MHz / 8 = 3.25MHz
>   * clock period: 1 / 3.25MHz = 308ns
>   *
> - * processing time: 376 * 308ns = 116us
> + * max processing time: 266431 * 308ns = 83ms(approx)
>   */
> -#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 116 /* microsec */
> +#define IDLE_TIMEOUT 83 /* milliseconds */
>  
>  #define TSCADC_CELLS		2
>  
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: Increase timeout value waiting for ADC sample

[Vignesh R]

On Monday 15 August 2016 09:17 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 08/08/16 12:05, Vignesh R wrote:
>> Now that open delay and sample delay for each channel is configurable
>> via DT, the default IDLE_TIMEOUT value is not enough as this is
>> calculated based on hardcoded macros. This results in driver returning
>> EBUSY sometimes. Fix this by increasing the timeout
>> value based on maximum value possible to open delay and sample delays
>> for each channel.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>
> As with patch 1 could you provide a fixes tag as well highlighting the
> patch that introduced the issue. I'm thinking you are referring to:
> 
> iio: adc: ti_am335x_adc: make sample delay, open delay, averaging DT parameters
> 5dc11e810676ec4a5acb4423ccd33314bf74f4e54

Yes, will send v2 with fixes tag pointing to above commit. Thanks!

-- 
Regards
Vignesh