From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
"Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
"Jonathan Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/20] iio: introduced iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() that takes a data_total_len argument.
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 10:51:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250413105119.56b0e887@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z_OYWKli6qVPgW2_@smile.fi.intel.com>
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:18:16 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 06, 2025 at 06:19:46PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> >
> > Check that data_total_len argument against iio_dev->scan_bytes.
> >
> > The size needs to be at least as big as the scan. It can be larger,
> > which is typical if only part of fixed sized storage is used due to
> > a subset of channels being enabled.
>
> ...
>
> > +static inline int iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > + void *data, size_t data_total_len,
> > + int64_t timestamp)
>
> Do we still need to inherit int64_t type? Can't it be s64 instead?
Indeed not. I'll not update the existing call because I expect that to
go away shortly but definitely doesn't make sense to keep the mysterious int64_t
usage here.
>
> > +{
> > + if (unlikely(data_total_len < indio_dev->scan_bytes)) {
>
> > + dev_err(&indio_dev->dev,
> > + "Undersized storage pushed to buffer\n");
>
> One line, even for the fanatics of 80.
It's 82 chars :) Fair enough though.
>
> > + return -ENOSPC;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp(indio_dev, data, timestamp);
> > +}
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-13 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-06 17:19 [PATCH v2 00/20] IIO: Introduce iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() taking an input buffer length argument Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 01/20] iio: adc: ad7266: Fix potential timestamp alignment issue Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:16 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-07 16:23 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 02/20] iio: adc: ad7768-1: Fix insufficient alignment of timestamp Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:16 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-07 16:23 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 03/20] iio: adc: dln2: Use aligned_s64 for timestamp Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:11 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 04/20] iio: accel: adxl355: Make timestamp 64 bit aligned using aligned_s64 Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-07 16:24 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 05/20] iio: introduced iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() that takes a data_total_len argument Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:18 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-13 9:51 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2025-04-07 16:25 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 06/20] iio: dummy: Use a fixed structure to build up scan to push to buffers Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:23 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-07 16:34 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-13 10:05 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 16:34 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-13 10:05 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 07/20] iio: dummy: Switch to iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() and provide size of storage Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:25 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-07 16:37 ` Nuno Sá
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 08/20] iio: adc: ti-ads131e08: Use new iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() to provide length sanity check Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:26 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 09/20] iio: adc: Use iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() to provide length for runtime checks Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:30 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-13 10:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 10/20] iio: accel: " Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 9:33 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 11/20] iio: accel: hid: " Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 12/20] iio: chemical: " Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 13/20] iio: temp: maxim-thermocouple: Fix potential lack of DMA safe buffer Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 14/20] iio: temperature: Use iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() to provide length for runtime checks Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 15/20] iio: resolver: " Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 16/20] iio: proximity: irsd200: Use a struct for scan and iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 17/20] iio: proximity: Use iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() to provide length for runtime checks Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:19 ` [PATCH v2 18/20] iio: pressure: zpa2326: Use aligned_s64 for the timestamp Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-06 17:20 ` [PATCH v2 19/20] iio: pressure: Use iio_push_to_buffers_with_ts() to provide length for runtime checks Jonathan Cameron
2025-04-07 11:27 ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-04-06 17:20 ` [PATCH v2 20/20] iio: magnetometer: " 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=20250413105119.56b0e887@jic23-huawei \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.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