public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

      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