From: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
To: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
Antoniu Miclaus <antoniu.miclaus@analog.com>,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org>,
Shrikant Raskar <raskar.shree97@gmail.com>,
Per-Daniel Olsson <perdaniel.olsson@axis.com>
Cc: "Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
"Guenter Roeck" <groeck@chromium.org>,
"Jonathan Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] iio: core: Introduce cleanup.h support for mode locks
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 16:08:07 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e77ebef-07b3-49ae-9d53-d24616569a74@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260106-lock-impr-v3-0-1db909b192c0@gmail.com>
On 1/6/26 2:06 AM, Kurt Borja wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In a recent driver review discussion [1], Andy Shevchenko suggested we
> add cleanup.h support for the lock API:
>
> iio_device_claim_{direct,buffer_mode}().
>
> Which would allow some nice code simplification in many places. Some
> examples are given as patches, but the last two are the biggest
> differences.
>
> In this version I dropped the RFC tag, as the general feeling is to go
> through with this after some modifications. Main one is the addition of
> IIO_DEV_ACQUIRE_{BUFFER,CLAIM}_MODE() wrappers to avoid drivers using
> the guard classes directly. I also added comments on the forbidden ways
> to use this API but I definitely still take suggestions on this.
>
> For now I dropped iio_device_claim_buffer_mode() rename, as this point
> is still being discussed. My suggestion based on the RFC discussion is
> to do it, but in a separate patch (using coccinelle) and while we're at
> it rename the whole API like this:
>
> iio_dev_mode_lock()
> iio_dev_mode_direct_trylock()
> iio_dev_mode_buffer_trylock()
> iio_dev_mode_unlock()
>
> Let me know what you think and thanks for taking a look!
>
> Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com>
> ---
Like Jonathan, I just had a few minor suggestions, but overall:
Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-16 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-06 8:06 [PATCH v3 0/7] iio: core: Introduce cleanup.h support for mode locks Kurt Borja
2026-01-06 8:06 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] iio: core: Add and export __iio_dev_mode_lock() Kurt Borja
2026-01-16 20:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-17 19:32 ` Kurt Borja
2026-01-06 8:06 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] iio: core: Refactor iio_device_claim_direct() implementation Kurt Borja
2026-01-16 21:51 ` David Lechner
[not found] ` <CAHp75Vei0q4bJrfuv28B+f-JOn2DGBkE3LT3UX8TiTnmUgDw_w@mail.gmail.com>
2026-01-17 19:45 ` Kurt Borja
2026-01-06 8:06 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] iio: core: Match iio_device_claim_*() semantics and implementation Kurt Borja
2026-01-06 8:06 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] iio: core: Add cleanup.h support for iio_device_claim_*() Kurt Borja
2026-01-16 20:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-16 22:03 ` David Lechner
2026-01-18 15:23 ` Kurt Borja
2026-01-18 19:30 ` David Lechner
2026-01-06 8:07 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] iio: health: max30102: Use IIO cleanup helpers Kurt Borja
2026-01-06 8:07 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] iio: light: opt4060: " Kurt Borja
2026-01-16 20:33 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] iio: core: Introduce cleanup.h support for mode locks Jonathan Cameron
2026-01-17 19:42 ` Kurt Borja
2026-01-16 22:08 ` David Lechner [this message]
2026-01-17 19:44 ` Kurt Borja
2026-01-18 10:00 ` Nuno Sá
2026-01-18 15:19 ` Kurt Borja
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=4e77ebef-07b3-49ae-9d53-d24616569a74@baylibre.com \
--to=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=Michael.Hennerich@analog.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@intel.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=antoniu.miclaus@analog.com \
--cc=bleung@chromium.org \
--cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=groeck@chromium.org \
--cc=gwendal@chromium.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=kuurtb@gmail.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
--cc=perdaniel.olsson@axis.com \
--cc=raskar.shree97@gmail.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