From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lethal@linux-sh.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: request fixes
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:53:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200812260753.14981.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081226052121.6472.22847.sendpatchset@rx1.opensource.se>
On Thursday 25 December 2008, Magnus Damm wrote:
> From: Magnus Damm <damm@igel.co.jp>
>
> Fix request related issues in gpiolib such as:
> - fix request-already-requested handling in gpio_request()
> - clear FLAG_REQUESTED on request error in gpio_direction_input()
> - clear FLAG_REQUESTED on request error in gpio_direction_output()
>
> Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@igel.co.jp>
> ---
>
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> --- 0001/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ work/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c 2008-12-26 13:09:50.000000000 +0900
> @@ -789,6 +789,7 @@ int gpio_request(unsigned gpio, const ch
> } else {
> status = -EBUSY;
> module_put(chip->owner);
> + goto done;
Right, good catch.
> }
>
> if (chip->request) {
> @@ -924,6 +925,7 @@ int gpio_direction_input(unsigned gpio)
> /* and it's not available to anyone else ...
> * gpio_request() is the fully clean solution.
> */
> + clear_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &desc->flags);
NAK, this is insufficient ... it would need to drop the module
refcount and null the label too. Plus this invalidates the
comment. (Same below.)
However a basic premise is that drivers should now be avoiding
this legacy autorequest stuff, using gpio_request() instead.
Hence the comments here, below, and at ensure_requested() to
note the lack of cleanup if these legacy paths lose: small
incentives to "do the right thing". I'd rather see the work
go into making callers stop using autorequest; not making
that mechanism work better.
It may be time to make ensure_requested() use WARN(), which
will create a lot more noise than the current message ... a
larger incentive. :)
> goto lose;
> }
> }
> @@ -977,6 +979,7 @@ int gpio_direction_output(unsigned gpio,
> /* and it's not available to anyone else ...
> * gpio_request() is the fully clean solution.
> */
> + clear_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &desc->flags);
> goto lose;
> }
> }
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-26 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-26 5:21 [PATCH] gpiolib: request fixes Magnus Damm
2008-12-26 15:53 ` David Brownell [this message]
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=200812260753.14981.david-b@pacbell.net \
--to=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@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