From: Guoqing Chi <chi962464zy@163.com>
To: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Cc: martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
chiguoqing@yulong.com, huyue2@yulong.com, zhangwen@yulong.com,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: imu: bmi160: add mutex_lock for avoiding race
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 09:48:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210120094802.00001fee@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c93224b5-008c-fc80-f466-88c387d5b08f@redhat.com>
On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 06:54:45 -0800
Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 1/19/21 3:22 AM, Guoqing Chi wrote:
> > From: chiguoqing <chi962464zy@163.com>
> >
> > Adding mutex_lock, when read and write reg need to use this lock to
> > avoid race.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guoqing Chi <chiguoqing@yulong.com>
> > ---
> > v2:Follow write function to fix read function.
> > Adding mutex init in core probe function.
> > Adding break in switch case at read and write function.
> >
> > drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160.h | 2 ++
> > drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c | 34
> > +++++++++++++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 11
> > deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160.h
> > b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160.h index 32c2ea2d7112..0c189a8b5b53
> > 100644 --- a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160.h
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160.h
> > @@ -3,9 +3,11 @@
> > #define BMI160_H_
> >
> > #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
> > +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> > #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
> >
> > struct bmi160_data {
> > + struct mutex lock;
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > struct iio_trigger *trig;
> > struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[2];
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c
> > b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c index
> > 290b5ef83f77..e303378f4841 100644 ---
> > a/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c +++
> > b/drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c @@ -452,26 +452,32 @@ static
> > int bmi160_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int ret;
> > struct bmi160_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> >
> > + mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> > switch (mask) {
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
> > ret = bmi160_get_data(data, chan->type,
> > chan->channel2, val);
> > - if (ret)
> > - return ret;
> > - return IIO_VAL_INT;
> > + if (!ret)
> > + ret = IIO_VAL_INT;
> > + break;
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE:
> > *val = 0;
> > ret = bmi160_get_scale(data,
> > bmi160_to_sensor(chan->type),
> > val2);
> > - return ret ? ret : IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
> > + if (!ret)
> > + ret = IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
>
> Looking better, another question..
>
> Why does the write() function return the results directly while the
> read() function
>
> translates them to other values ?
>
> Tom
It is original design in this driver. In order to
differentiate raw to scale and SAMP_FREQ, while the scale and SAMP_FREQ
are needless. I think log information can be added for this purpose,
and return results directly.
It is not change the return values for my modify.It's best to keep the
original design.Is that all right?
Guoqing Chi
>
> > + break;
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ:
> > ret = bmi160_get_odr(data,
> > bmi160_to_sensor(chan->type), val, val2);
> > - return ret ? ret : IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
> > + if (!ret)
> > + ret = IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
> > + break;
> > default:
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > }
> > + mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
> >
> > - return 0;
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> > static int bmi160_write_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > @@ -479,19 +485,24 @@ static int bmi160_write_raw(struct iio_dev
> > *indio_dev, int val, int val2, long mask)
> > {
> > struct bmi160_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > + int result;
> >
> > + mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> > switch (mask) {
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE:
> > - return bmi160_set_scale(data,
> > + result = bmi160_set_scale(data,
> > bmi160_to_sensor(chan->type),
> > val2);
> > + break;
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ:
> > - return bmi160_set_odr(data,
> > bmi160_to_sensor(chan->type),
> > + result = bmi160_set_odr(data,
> > bmi160_to_sensor(chan->type), val, val2);
> > + break;
> > default:
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > + result = -EINVAL;
> > }
> > + mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
> >
> > - return 0;
> > + return result;
> > }
> >
> > static
> > @@ -838,6 +849,7 @@ int bmi160_core_probe(struct device *dev,
> > struct regmap *regmap, return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > + mutex_init(&data->lock);
> > dev_set_drvdata(dev, indio_dev);
> > data->regmap = regmap;
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-20 1:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20210119112211.26404-1-chi962464zy@163.com>
2021-01-19 14:54 ` [PATCH v2] iio: imu: bmi160: add mutex_lock for avoiding race Tom Rix
2021-01-20 1:48 ` Guoqing Chi [this message]
2021-01-20 15:06 ` Tom Rix
2021-01-23 15:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-01-26 2:58 ` Guoqing Chi
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=20210120094802.00001fee@163.com \
--to=chi962464zy@163.com \
--cc=chiguoqing@yulong.com \
--cc=huyue2@yulong.com \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
--cc=zhangwen@yulong.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox