From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA205C282C4 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:35:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 967CD222C1 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:35:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550003752; bh=xgjB4tBcTRaeShPv0xeqGqF5KleQWyPU2pH73C5XnY0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=RW35pRbSmGetr2XeCjtuZLgeyHGP4iCYt2UFmF1nsO3WzTQ0SEYpy1kXBr3PL5YQk F9BJWhDoIpvwCoySCnD8L2p+//NiApz/GCjcAe/AIJNXdXRqJaxmP0yxMsEYQZD9EM 3Evgz6SUte+HOZZyGsx5hNrLKF7UistazQ2QTcrE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731247AbfBLUfv (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:35:51 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45650 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727733AbfBLUfu (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:35:50 -0500 Received: from archlinux (cpc91196-cmbg18-2-0-cust659.5-4.cable.virginm.net [81.96.234.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 916E3222BE; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:35:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550003750; bh=xgjB4tBcTRaeShPv0xeqGqF5KleQWyPU2pH73C5XnY0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=skkl4+V5+/jDplhAwrIZqFuKe+YGrQakJWpR51wr/2VB39Xi/2g76+4/N8QEGm8Hk XjQeooV1l2v4HjUAi+8Gc50yQ5SfY+SlKmynCVLhg3x1DhT53eopK8UX2wMuat6BCO YQd33A0fg88psDvO/H7yswZ2G1oOrnx/WT2xZfyM= Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:35:43 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Justin Chen Cc: David Lechner , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list , Florian Fainelli , bgolaszewski@baylibre.com, Linus Walleij , knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, Peter Meerwald-Stadler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: ti-ads7950: add GPIO support Message-ID: <20190212203544.181b8c19@archlinux> In-Reply-To: References: <1549653856-47409-1-git-send-email-justinpopo6@gmail.com> <20190209170042.69a78684@archlinux> <2e692086-4be5-10ea-34b0-4444995c4275@lechnology.com> <20190211200557.7648d447@archlinux> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:17:37 -0800 Justin Chen wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:06 PM Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > > On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 12:56:11 -0600 > > David Lechner wrote: > > > > > On 2/9/19 11:00 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > > Nope. This is a state lock used to protect against transitions between > > > > different modes of the IIO device (buffered vs polled), it > > > > isn't suitable for general use. > > > > > > > > The driver should be modified to handle that correctly. > > > > We have iio_claim_direct_mode etc that deal with the case > > > > where a device can't do certain operations whilst in buffered > > > > mode. Note it can fail and should. > > > > > > > > Seems there are more drivers still doing this than I thought. > > > > If anyone is bored and wants to clean them out, that would be > > > > most appreciated! > > > > > > > > If you need locking to protect a local buffer or the device > > > > state, define a new lock to do it with clearly documented > > > > scope. > > > > > > Just as a reminder, there is a use case for this particular > > > chip that requires buffered mode and direct mode at the same > > > time. > > > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10539021/ > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10527757/ > > > > Thanks, I had indeed forgotten that entirely. > > So it should have a local lock and not take mlock explicitly at all. > > > Thanks for all the feedback. > So If I am understanding this correctly. I should create a local lock > to synchronize three different type of transactions (buffered, direct, > gpio). > I do not want to use iio_claim_direct_mode because that doesn't allow > simultaneous use of buffered mode and direct mode, which is necessary > for this driver because of the above mentioned patch. No, you should create a local lock to do just one thing. Protect the buffers used in those transactions. There is no need to protect anything else explicitly. On some devices there are multiple transaction writes, but I don't recall that being the case here. Jonathan > > Justin > > Jonathan