From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Harald Geyer <harald@ccbib.org>
Cc: jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de,
pmeerw@pmeerw.net, sanjeev_sharma@mentor.com,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 18:58:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <547DFDD8.1010404@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1XvmLC-0001BT-F3@stardust.g4.wien.funkfeuer.at>
Harald,
Am 02.12.2014 um 13:14 schrieb Harald Geyer:
>>> Move the locking out of the if statement.
>>
>> Care to explain why?
>
> The purpose of the if statement is to limit the number of data
> transmissions if values are requested multiple times in short
> succession. (Ie an application reading both sensor values.)
>
> If we have concurrent reads, then the later one will wait in the
> mutex_lock() while the former will update the timestamp. If the
> later one resumes, it won't check the timestamp and cause an
> unnecessary data transmission.
Okay, makes sense.
I'll update my patch!
>
>> But I found another issue in my patch.
>> The "dht11->num_edges = -1;" before "return ret" needs to go into the locked area.
>> Will send an updated version soon.
>>
>>> BTW, it seems that there is already locking around read_raw() in the
>>> in-kernel consumer interface but not in the sysfs interface. Is there
>>> any reason for this difference?
>>
>> Dunno. :-)
>
> If locking is actually necessary, then this would be a bug in the
> current version of the driver, which wasn't caught by at least three
> people doing reviews, so maybe let's find out if it really is necessary
> or if I'm missing something ...
Maybe IIO folks can tell us more.
What I see in other IIO drivers is that they all have locking in the read functions
and so far I see no global serialization in IIO itself.
Thanks,
//richard
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-02 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-01 20:27 [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking Richard Weinberger
2014-12-01 20:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] iio: dht11: IRQ fixes Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 10:19 ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 10:54 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 12:58 ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 18:12 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 19:49 ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 20:39 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-03 20:14 ` Hartmut Knaack
2014-12-02 10:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] iio: dht11: Add locking Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 10:52 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-12-02 12:14 ` Harald Geyer
2014-12-02 17:58 ` Richard Weinberger [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=547DFDD8.1010404@nod.at \
--to=richard@nod.at \
--cc=harald@ccbib.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=sanjeev_sharma@mentor.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