Re: [PATCHv2 8/9] hackrf: add support for transmitter

[Antti Palosaari <crope@iki.fi>]

On 07/27/2015 11:38 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 07/27/2015 10:21 PM, Antti Palosaari wrote:
>> On 07/17/2015 05:43 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>>> On 07/16/2015 09:04 AM, Antti Palosaari wrote:
>>>> HackRF SDR device has both receiver and transmitter. There is limitation
>>>> that receiver and transmitter cannot be used at the same time
>>>> (half-duplex operation). That patch implements transmitter support to
>>>> existing receiver only driver.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Antti Palosaari <crope@iki.fi>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/media/usb/hackrf/hackrf.c | 787 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>>>    1 file changed, 572 insertions(+), 215 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> @@ -611,8 +751,15 @@ static int hackrf_queue_setup(struct vb2_queue *vq,
>>>>    		unsigned int *nplanes, unsigned int sizes[], void *alloc_ctxs[])
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct hackrf_dev *dev = vb2_get_drv_priv(vq);
>>>> +	struct usb_interface *intf = dev->intf;
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>>
>>>> -	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "nbuffers=%d\n", *nbuffers);
>>>> +	dev_dbg(&intf->dev, "nbuffers=%d\n", *nbuffers);
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (test_and_set_bit(QUEUE_SETUP, &dev->flags)) {
>>>> +		ret = -EBUSY;
>>>> +		goto err;
>>>> +	}
>>>
>>> This doesn't work. The bit is only cleared when start_streaming fails or
>>> stop_streaming is called. But the application can also call REQBUFS again
>>> or just close the file handle, and then QUEUE_SETUP should also be cleared.
>>>
>>> But why is this here in the first place? It doesn't seem to do anything
>>> useful (except mess up the v4l2-compliance tests).
>>>
>>> I've removed it and it now seems to work OK.
>>
>> It is there to block simultaneous use of receiver and transmitter.
>> Device could operate only single mode at the time - receiving or
>> transmitting. Driver shares streaming buffers.
>>
>> Any idea how I can easily implement correct blocking?
>
> Since each video_device struct has its own vb2_queue I wouldn't put the check
> here. Instead, put the check in the start_streaming callback. And the check
> is easy enough: if you want to start capturing, then call
> vb2_is_streaming(&tx_vb2_queue). If you want to start output, then call
> vb2_is_streaming(&rx_vb2_queue). If the other 'side' is streaming, then
> return EBUSY.
>
> It's perfectly valid to allocate the buffers, but actually streaming is an
> exclusive operation.

Currently there is two queues, but only single buffer. If I do check on 
start_streaming() it is too late as buffers are queue during buf_queue() 
which is called earlier (and now both sides are added to same 
queued_bufs lists, which messes up).


regards
Antti

-- 
http://palosaari.fi/