On Tue, Nov 28, 2023, at 15:08, Herve Codina wrote:
> @@ -272,6 +274,8 @@ int qmc_chan_get_info(struct qmc_chan *chan, struct
> qmc_chan_info *info)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->ts_lock, flags);
> +
> info->mode = chan->mode;
> info->rx_fs_rate = tsa_info.rx_fs_rate;
> info->rx_bit_rate = tsa_info.rx_bit_rate;
> @@ -280,6 +284,8 @@ int qmc_chan_get_info(struct qmc_chan *chan, struct
> qmc_chan_info *info)
> info->tx_bit_rate = tsa_info.tx_bit_rate;
> info->nb_rx_ts = hweight64(chan->rx_ts_mask);
>
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->ts_lock, flags);
> +
> return 0;
> }
I would normally use spin_lock_irq() instead of spin_lock_irqsave()
in functions that are only called outside of atomic context.
> +static int qmc_chan_start_rx(struct qmc_chan *chan);
> +
> int qmc_chan_stop(struct qmc_chan *chan, int direction)
> {
...
> -static void qmc_chan_start_rx(struct qmc_chan *chan)
> +static int qmc_setup_chan_trnsync(struct qmc *qmc, struct qmc_chan *chan);
> +
> +static int qmc_chan_start_rx(struct qmc_chan *chan)
> {
Can you reorder the static functions in a way that avoids the
forward declarations?
Arnd
