On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 02:36:55PM +0000, James Ogletree wrote:
>
> > On Jan 9, 2024, at 4:31 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:03:02PM +0000, James Ogletree wrote:
> >> Hi Dmitry,
> >>
> >> Thank you for your excellent review. Just a few questions.
> >>
> >>> On Jan 6, 2024, at 7:58 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 10:36:37PM +0000, James Ogletree wrote:
> >>>> +
> >>>> + info->add_effect.u.periodic.custom_data = kcalloc(len, sizeof(s16), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>> + if (!info->add_effect.u.periodic.custom_data)
> >>>> + return -ENOMEM;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (copy_from_user(info->add_effect.u.periodic.custom_data,
> >>>> + effect->u.periodic.custom_data, sizeof(s16) * len)) {
> >>>> + info->add_error = -EFAULT;
> >>>> + goto out_free;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + queue_work(info->vibe_wq, &info->add_work);
> >>>> + flush_work(&info->add_work);
> >>>
> >>> I do not understand the need of scheduling a work here. You are
> >>> obviously in a sleeping context (otherwise you would not be able to
> >>> execute flush_work()) so you should be able to upload the effect right
> >>> here.
> >>
> >> Scheduling work here is to ensure its ordering with “playback" worker
> >> items, which themselves are called in atomic context and so need
> >> deferred work. I think this explains why we need a workqueue as well,
> >> but please correct me.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static int vibra_playback(struct input_dev *dev, int effect_id, int val)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct vibra_info *info = input_get_drvdata(dev);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (val > 0) {
> >>>
> >>> value is supposed to signal how many times an effect should be repeated.
> >>> It looks like you are not handling this at all.
> >>
> >> For playbacks, we mandate that the input_event value field is set to either 1
> >
> > I am sorry, who is "we"?
>
> Just a royal “I”. Apologies, no claim to authority intended here. :)
>
> >
> >> or 0 to command either a start playback or stop playback respectively.
> >> Values other than that should be rejected, so in the next version I will fix this
> >> to explicitly check for 1 or 0.
> >
> > No, please implement the API properly.
>
> Ack.
>
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> + info->start_effect = &dev->ff->effects[effect_id];
> >>>> + queue_work(info->vibe_wq, &info->vibe_start_work);
> >>>
> >>> The API allows playback of several effects at once, the way you have it
> >>> done here if multiple requests come at same time only one will be
> >>> handled.
> >>
> >> I think I may need some clarification on this point. Why would concurrent
> >> start/stop playback commands get dropped? It seems they would all be
> >> added to the workqueue and executed eventually.
> >
> > You only have one instance of vibe_start_work, as well as only one
> > "slot" to hold the effect you want to start. So if you issue 2 request
> > back to back to play effect 1 and 2 you are likely to end with
> > info->start_effect == 2 and that is what vibe_start_work handler will
> > observe, effectively dropping request to play effect 1 on the floor.
>
> Understood, ack.
>
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> + } else {
> >>>> + queue_work(info->vibe_wq, &info->vibe_stop_work);
> >>>
> >>> Which effect are you stopping? All of them? You need to stop a
> >>> particular one.
> >>
> >> Our implementation of “stop” stops all effects in flight which is intended.
> >> That is probably unusual so I will add a comment here in the next
> >> version.
> >
> > Again, please implement the driver properly, not define your own
> > carveouts for the expected behavior.
>
> Ack, and a clarification question: the device is not actually able to
> play multiple effects at once. In that case, does stopping a specific
> effect entail just cancelling an effect in the queue?
In this case I believe the device should declare maximum number of
effects as 1. Userspace is supposed to determine maximum number of
simultaneously playable effects by issuing EVIOCGEFFECTS ioctl on the
corresponding event device.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
