From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 00/10] IIO: Use the new cleanup.h magic
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2024 17:39:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240114173909.1b8defec@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240114173336.360443cb@jic23-huawei>
On Sun, 14 Jan 2024 17:33:36 +0000
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 19:10:48 -0600
> David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 11:36 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > >
> > > A lot of the advantages of the automated cleanup added for locks and similar
> > > are not that useful in IIO unless we also deal with the
> > > iio_device_claim_direct_mode() / iio_device_release_direct_mode()
> > > calls that prevent IIO device drivers from transitioning into buffered
> > > mode whilst calls are in flight + prevent sysfs reads and writes from
> > > interfering with buffered capture if it is enabled.
> > >
> > > Relies on Peter Zilstra's conditional cleanup handling which is queued
> > > up for the merge window in the tip tree. This series is based on
> > > a merge of tip/master into iio/togreg.
> > >
> > > All comments welcome. If this looks positive I'll make use of it in a
> > > lot more drivers, but hopefully these give an idea of how it will work.
> > >
> > > The need to always handle what happens after
> > > iio_device_claim_direct_scoped() {} is a little irritating but the
> > > compiler will warn if you don't do it and it's not obvious how to
> > > let the compiler know the magic loop (hidden in the cleanup.h macros)
> > > always runs once. Example:
> > >
> > > iio_device_claim_direct_scoped(return -EBUSY, indio_dev) {
> > > return 42;
> > > }
> > > /* Can't actually get here, but compiler moans if no return val */
> > > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Maybe better would be?
> >
> > unreachable();
>
> Interesting thought, but there is very little precedence for using that in the kernel.
> + I think it's a C23 feature so we'd be relying on whether gcc and clang happened
> to implement it rather than being sure it was available.
Ah. I'd missed the default implementation in compiler.h.
So let us fall back on the first argument of limited precedence.
J
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> >
> > > }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-14 17:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-17 17:35 [RFC PATCH V2 00/10] IIO: Use the new cleanup.h magic Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] iio: locking: introduce __cleanup() based direct mode claiming infrastructure Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] iio: dummy: Use automatic lock and direct mode cleanup Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] iio: accel: adxl367: Use automated cleanup for locks and iio direct mode Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] iio: imu: bmi323: Use cleanup handling for iio_device_claim_direct_mode() Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] iio: adc: max1363: Use automatic cleanup for locks and iio mode claiming Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] iio: proximity: sx9360: Use automated cleanup for locks and IIO " Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] iio: proximity: sx9324: " Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] iio: proximity: sx9310: " Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] iio: adc: ad4130: Use automatic cleanup of locks and direct mode Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-17 17:35 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] iio: adc: ad7091r-base: Use auto cleanup of locks Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-18 1:10 ` [RFC PATCH V2 00/10] IIO: Use the new cleanup.h magic David Lechner
2024-01-14 17:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-14 17:39 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-01-15 15:49 ` David Lechner
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=20240114173909.1b8defec@jic23-huawei \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--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