From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@linux.it>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
davej@redhat.com, sam@ravnborg.org, greg@kroah.com,
randy.dunlap@oracle.com, giometti@linux.it
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support.
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:03:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080320130356.69ab65fe.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12048053473401-git-send-email-giometti@linux.it>
On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 13:09:00 +0100
Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@linux.it> wrote:
> +pps_core-y := pps.o kapi.o sysfs.o
Does it compile OK with CONFIG_SYSFS=n?
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/sched.h>
> +#include <linux/time.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/idr.h>
> +#include <linux/fs.h>
> +#include <linux/pps.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * Global variables
> + */
> +
> +DEFINE_SPINLOCK(idr_lock);
This name is insufficiently specific. Not only does it risk linkage
errors, it makes it ahrd for poeple to work out where the symbol came from.
I renamed it to pps_idr_lock.
> +DEFINE_IDR(pps_idr);
>
> ...
>
> +void pps_unregister_source(int source)
> +{
> + struct pps_device *pps;
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&idr_lock);
> + pps = idr_find(&pps_idr, source);
> +
> + if (!pps) {
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idr_lock);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* This should be done first in order to deny IRQ handlers
> + * to access PPS structs
> + */
> +
> + idr_remove(&pps_idr, pps->id);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idr_lock);
> +
> + wait_event(pps->usage_queue, atomic_read(&pps->usage) == 0);
> +
> + pps_sysfs_remove_source_entry(pps);
> + pps_unregister_cdev(pps);
> + kfree(pps);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pps_unregister_source);
The wait_event() stuff really shouldn't be here: it should be integral to
the refcounting:
void pps_dev_put(struct pps_device *pps)
{
spin_lock_irq(&pps_lock);
if (atomic_dec_and_test(&pps->usage))
idr_remove(&pps_idr, pps->id);
else
pps = NULL;
spin_unlock_irq(&pps_lock);
if (pps) {
/*
* Might need to do the below via schedule_work() if
* pps_dev_put() is to be callable from atomic context
*/
pps_sysfs_remove_source_entry(pps);
pps_unregister_cdev(pps);
kfree(pps);
}
}
As it stands, there might be deadlocks such as when a process which itself
holds a ref on the pps_device (with an open fd?) calls
pps_unregister_source.
Also, we need to take care that all processes which were waiting in
pps_unregister_source() get to finish their cleanup before we permit rmmod
to proceed. Is that handled somewhere?
> +void pps_event(int source, int event, void *data)
Please document the API in the kernel source. I realise there's a teeny
bit of documentation in pps.txt, but people don't think to look there and
it tends to go out of date.
It doesn't have to be fancy formal kerneldoc - it's better to add *good*
comments which tell people what they need to know. For some reason people
seem to add useless obvious stuff when they do their comments in kerneldoc
form.
> +{
> + struct pps_device *pps;
> + struct timespec __ts;
> + struct pps_ktime ts;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + /* First of all we get the time stamp... */
> + getnstimeofday(&__ts);
> +
> + /* ... and translate it to PPS time data struct */
> + ts.sec = __ts.tv_sec;
> + ts.nsec = __ts.tv_nsec;
> +
> + if ((event & (PPS_CAPTUREASSERT | PPS_CAPTURECLEAR)) == 0) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "pps: unknown event (%x) for source %d\n",
> + event, source);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&idr_lock, flags);
> + pps = idr_find(&pps_idr, source);
> +
> + /* If we find a valid PPS source we lock it before leaving
> + * the lock!
> + */
> + if (pps)
> + atomic_inc(&pps->usage);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&idr_lock, flags);
The above pattern is repeated rather a lot and could perhaps be extracted
into a nice pps_dev_get() helper.
> + if (!pps)
> + return;
> +
> + pr_debug("PPS event on source %d at %llu.%06u\n",
> + pps->id, ts.sec, ts.nsec);
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&pps->lock, flags);
> +
> + /* Must call the echo function? */
> + if ((pps->params.mode & (PPS_ECHOASSERT | PPS_ECHOCLEAR)))
> + pps->info.echo(source, event, data);
> +
> + /* Check the event */
> + pps->current_mode = pps->params.mode;
> + if (event & PPS_CAPTUREASSERT) {
> + /* We have to add an offset? */
> + if (pps->params.mode & PPS_OFFSETASSERT)
> + pps_add_offset(&ts, &pps->params.assert_off_tu);
> +
> + /* Save the time stamp */
> + pps->assert_tu = ts;
> + pps->assert_sequence++;
> + pr_debug("capture assert seq #%u for source %d\n",
> + pps->assert_sequence, source);
> + }
> + if (event & PPS_CAPTURECLEAR) {
> + /* We have to add an offset? */
> + if (pps->params.mode & PPS_OFFSETCLEAR)
> + pps_add_offset(&ts, &pps->params.clear_off_tu);
> +
> + /* Save the time stamp */
> + pps->clear_tu = ts;
> + pps->clear_sequence++;
> + pr_debug("capture clear seq #%u for source %d\n",
> + pps->clear_sequence, source);
> + }
> +
> + pps->go = ~0;
> + wake_up_interruptible(&pps->queue);
> +
> + kill_fasync(&pps->async_queue, SIGIO, POLL_IN);
> +
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pps->lock, flags);
> +
> + /* Now we can release the PPS source for (possible) deregistration */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&idr_lock, flags);
> + atomic_dec(&pps->usage);
> + wake_up_all(&pps->usage_queue);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&idr_lock, flags);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pps_event);
>
> ...
>
> +static int pps_cdev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> + struct pps_device *pps = container_of(inode->i_cdev,
> + struct pps_device, cdev);
> + int found;
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&idr_lock);
> + found = idr_find(&pps_idr, pps->id) != NULL;
> +
> + /* Lock the PPS source against (possible) deregistration */
> + if (found)
> + atomic_inc(&pps->usage);
> +
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idr_lock);
That looks a bit odd. How can the pps_device not be registered in the IDR
tree at this stage?
> + if (!found)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + file->private_data = pps;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
>
> ...
>
> +/* Kernel consumers */
> +#define PPS_KC_HARDPPS 0 /* hardpps() (or equivalent) */
> +#define PPS_KC_HARDPPS_PLL 1 /* hardpps() constrained to
> + use a phase-locked loop */
> +#define PPS_KC_HARDPPS_FLL 2 /* hardpps() constrained to
> + use a frequency-locked loop */
> +/*
> + * Here begins the implementation-specific part!
> + */
> +
> +struct pps_fdata {
> + struct pps_kinfo info;
> + struct pps_ktime timeout;
> +};
> +
> +#include <linux/ioctl.h>
> +
> +#define PPS_CHECK _IO('P', 0)
> +#define PPS_GETPARAMS _IOR('P', 1, struct pps_kparams *)
> +#define PPS_SETPARAMS _IOW('P', 2, struct pps_kparams *)
> +#define PPS_GETCAP _IOR('P', 3, int *)
> +#define PPS_FETCH _IOWR('P', 4, struct pps_fdata *)
> +
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +
> +#include <linux/cdev.h>
> +#include <linux/device.h>
> +
> +#define PPS_VERSION "5.0.0"
> +#define PPS_MAX_SOURCES 16 /* should be enough... */
It's nice to avoid sprinkling #includes throughout the file, please.
People expect to be able to see what's being included in the first
screenful of the file.
> +/*
> + * Global defines
> + */
> +
> +/* The specific PPS source info */
> +struct pps_source_info {
> + char name[PPS_MAX_NAME_LEN]; /* simbolic name */
> + char path[PPS_MAX_NAME_LEN]; /* path of connected device */
> + int mode; /* PPS's allowed mode */
> +
> + void (*echo)(int source, int event, void *data); /* PPS echo function */
> +
> + struct module *owner;
> + struct device *dev;
> +};
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-20 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-06 12:08 LinuxPPS (RESUBMIT 2): the PPS Linux implementation Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 2/7] PPS: userland header file for PPS API Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 3/7] PPS: documentation programs and examples Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 4/7] PPS: LinuxPPS clients support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 5/7] PPS: serial " Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 6/7] PPS: example program to enable PPS support on serial ports Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-06 12:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] PPS: parallel port clients support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-20 20:04 ` [PATCH 5/7] PPS: serial " Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 11:17 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-21 17:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-25 10:38 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-20 20:03 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-03-25 14:44 ` [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-28 3:25 ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-01 8:42 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-01 8:55 ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-01 9:50 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-01 21:45 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-01 21:57 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 3:36 ` Kay Sievers
2008-03-21 10:56 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-21 17:00 ` Kay Sievers
2008-03-25 10:48 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-21 3:50 ` Kay Sievers
2008-03-21 10:57 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-21 17:01 ` Kay Sievers
2008-03-25 10:53 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-28 10:21 ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-01 8:59 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-01 9:09 ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-01 9:40 ` Rodolfo Giometti
2008-03-19 17:29 ` LinuxPPS (RESUBMIT 2): the PPS Linux implementation john stultz
2008-03-19 21:21 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-19 21:55 ` Dave Jones
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-04-10 15:15 LinuxPPS (RESUBMIT 3): " Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-10 15:15 ` [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-10 16:06 [PATCH 5/7] PPS: serial clients support Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-10 18:22 ` LinuxPPS (RESUBMIT 4): the PPS Linux implementation Rodolfo Giometti
2008-04-10 18:22 ` [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support Rodolfo Giometti
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=20080320130356.69ab65fe.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=giometti@linux.it \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.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