Hi Sakari,
On 2017-10-27 00:10:51 +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> On 2017-10-26 10:53:27 +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Refactor the V4L2 async framework a little in preparation for async
> > sub-device notifiers. This avoids making some structural changes in the
> > patch actually implementing sub-device notifiers, making that patch easier
> > to review.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I'm sorry I acted to soon, I think I found a small issue with this
patch, see bellow. With that fixed feel free to attach my ack.
>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > index 1b536d68cedf..eb31d96254d1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > @@ -125,12 +125,13 @@ static struct v4l2_async_subdev *v4l2_async_find_match(
> > }
> >
> > static int v4l2_async_match_notify(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier,
> > + struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> > struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> > struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd)
> > {
> > int ret;
> >
> > - ret = v4l2_device_register_subdev(notifier->v4l2_dev, sd);
> > + ret = v4l2_device_register_subdev(v4l2_dev, sd);
> > if (ret < 0)
> > return ret;
> >
> > @@ -151,6 +152,31 @@ static int v4l2_async_match_notify(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +/* Test all async sub-devices in a notifier for a match. */
> > +static int v4l2_async_notifier_try_all_subdevs(
> > + struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier)
> > +{
> > + struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev = notifier->v4l2_dev;
> > + struct v4l2_subdev *sd, *tmp;
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(sd, tmp, &subdev_list, async_list) {
> > + struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + asd = v4l2_async_find_match(notifier, sd);
> > + if (!asd)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + ret = v4l2_async_match_notify(notifier, v4l2_dev, sd, asd);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + mutex_unlock(&list_lock);
The mutex should not be unlocked here, as the caller will also unlock it
if ret is none zero. You fix this in 18/32 so the end result is OK but I
think its better to fix this in this patch.
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void v4l2_async_cleanup(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> > {
> > v4l2_device_unregister_subdev(sd);
> > @@ -172,18 +198,15 @@ static void v4l2_async_notifier_unbind_all_subdevs(
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -int v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> > - struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier)
> > +static int __v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier)
> > {
> > - struct v4l2_subdev *sd, *tmp;
> > struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd;
> > int ret;
> > int i;
> >
> > - if (!v4l2_dev || notifier->num_subdevs > V4L2_MAX_SUBDEVS)
> > + if (notifier->num_subdevs > V4L2_MAX_SUBDEVS)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - notifier->v4l2_dev = v4l2_dev;
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(¬ifier->waiting);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(¬ifier->done);
> >
> > @@ -216,18 +239,10 @@ int v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> >
> > mutex_lock(&list_lock);
> >
> > - list_for_each_entry_safe(sd, tmp, &subdev_list, async_list) {
> > - int ret;
> > -
> > - asd = v4l2_async_find_match(notifier, sd);
> > - if (!asd)
> > - continue;
> > -
> > - ret = v4l2_async_match_notify(notifier, sd, asd);
> > - if (ret < 0) {
> > - mutex_unlock(&list_lock);
> > - return ret;
> > - }
> > + ret = v4l2_async_notifier_try_all_subdevs(notifier);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + mutex_unlock(&list_lock);
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> > if (list_empty(¬ifier->waiting)) {
> > @@ -250,6 +265,23 @@ int v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> > +
> > +int v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev,
> > + struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(!v4l2_dev))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + notifier->v4l2_dev = v4l2_dev;
> > +
> > + ret = __v4l2_async_notifier_register(notifier);
> > + if (ret)
> > + notifier->v4l2_dev = NULL;
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(v4l2_async_notifier_register);
> >
> > void v4l2_async_notifier_unregister(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier)
> > @@ -324,7 +356,8 @@ int v4l2_async_register_subdev(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> > if (!asd)
> > continue;
> >
> > - ret = v4l2_async_match_notify(notifier, sd, asd);
> > + ret = v4l2_async_match_notify(notifier, notifier->v4l2_dev, sd,
> > + asd);
> > if (ret)
> > goto err_unlock;
> >
> > --
> > 2.11.0
> >
>
> --
> Regards,
> Niklas Söderlund
--
Regards,
Niklas Söderlund
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
