On 19/03/17 13:16, Gargi Sharma wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 17/03/17 09:32, Gargi Sharma wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 03/12/2017 02:32 PM, simran singhal wrote: >>>>> The IIO subsystem is redefining iio_dev->mlock to be used by >>>>> the IIO core only for protecting device operating mode changes. >>>>> ie. Changes between INDIO_DIRECT_MODE, INDIO_BUFFER_* modes. >>>>> >>>>> In this driver, mlock was being used to protect hardware state >>>>> changes. Replace it with a lock in the devices global data. >>>>> >>>>> Fix some coding style issues related to white space also. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhalsimran0@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7753.c | 14 ++++++++------ >>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7753.c b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7753.c >>>>> index dfd8b71..ca99d82 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7753.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7753.c >>>>> @@ -81,12 +81,14 @@ >>>>> * @tx: transmit buffer >>>>> * @rx: receive buffer >>>>> * @buf_lock: mutex to protect tx and rx >>>>> + * @lock: protect sensor state >>>> >>>> It might make sense to reuse the existing lock which currently protects the >>>> read/write functions. You can do this by introducing a variant of >>>> ade7753_spi_{read,write}_reg_16() that does not take a lock and use these to >>>> implement the read-modify-write cycle in a protected section. >>> >>> There are other read/write functions for example, >>> ade7753_spi_{read/write}_reg_8 that use the mutex as well. Should a >>> variant of these functions be introduced as well? Also, how does one >>> go about implementing RMW inside a protected section. >> Hmm. Simran has also been progressing with patches for this. >> > I was trying to work through a patch for ade7754. So ran into the same > problem :) > >> You raise a good question. There are other read/modify/write sequences in >> the driver. They don't have the same issue with potentially deadlocking >> against the buf lock as they are all using the spi subsystems provisions >> for small write/read cycles where buffer protection is handled internally. >> >> So let us address the cases in turn: >> >> static int ade7753_reset(struct device *dev) >> { >> u16 val; >> int ret; >> >> ret = ade7753_spi_read_reg_16(dev, ADE7753_MODE, &val); >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> val |= BIT(6); /* Software Chip Reset */ >> >> return ade7753_spi_write_reg_16(dev, ADE7753_MODE, val); >> } >> This is only called in the device initialization. At that point >> we should be fine in assuming no parallel calls. Crucial point >> is it is before the call to iio_device_register which exposes >> the userspace interfaces. >> >> static int ade7753_set_irq(struct device *dev, bool enable) >> { >> int ret; >> u8 irqen; >> >> ret = ade7753_spi_read_reg_8(dev, ADE7753_IRQEN, &irqen); >> if (ret) >> goto error_ret; >> >> if (enable) >> irqen |= BIT(3); /* Enables an interrupt when a data is >> * present in the waveform register >> */ >> else >> irqen &= ~BIT(3); >> >> ret = ade7753_spi_write_reg_8(dev, ADE7753_IRQEN, irqen); >> >> error_ret: >> return ret; >> } >> >> This one is actually safe because it is the only function that >> modifies that particular register. >> >> /* Power down the device */ >> static int ade7753_stop_device(struct device *dev) >> { >> u16 val; >> int ret; >> >> ret = ade7753_spi_read_reg_16(dev, ADE7753_MODE, &val); >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> val |= BIT(4); /* AD converters can be turned off */ >> >> return ade7753_spi_write_reg_16(dev, ADE7753_MODE, val); >> } >> >> Only called in remove (after userspace interfaces have been >> removed by the iio_device_unregister call so also should not >> be running concurrently with much else. >> > > The only nested lock here is ade7754_spi_write_reg_16, so as long as > that is refactored, it'll be fine. > >> So I think all the other cases are safe. Perhaps it would have >> been better to have had a lock around them, purely to make >> the code more resilient against future changes though. >> Probably a job to do as part of a larger scale pile of work >> on that driver rather than as a one off patch. > > Another question that I have is why are we writing inside a read > function(ade7754_spi_read_reg_24)? > It's a register read (sort of) hence the reg in the name. It's telling it which register to read by first writing that. > static int ade7754_spi_read_reg_24(struct device *dev, > u8 reg_address, u32 *val) > { > struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_to_iio_dev(dev); > struct ade7754_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev); > int ret; > struct spi_transfer xfers[] = { > { > .tx_buf = st->tx, > .rx_buf = st->rx, > .bits_per_word = 8, > .len = 4, > }, > }; > > mutex_lock(&st->buf_lock); > st->tx[0] = ADE7754_READ_REG(reg_address); > st->tx[1] = 0; > st->tx[2] = 0; > st->tx[3] = 0; > > ret = spi_sync_transfer(st->us, xfers, ARRAY_SIZE(xfers)); > if (ret) { > dev_err(&st->us->dev, "problem when reading 24 bit > register 0x%02X", > reg_address); > goto error_ret; > } > *val = (st->rx[1] << 16) | (st->rx[2] << 8) | st->rx[3]; > > error_ret: > mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock); > return ret; > } > > Thanks! > Gargi > >> >> Jonathan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Looking through the driver there seem to be other places as well that do >>>> read-modify-write that should be protected by a lock, but currently are not. >>>> This might be a good task. >>> >>> Am I right in understanding that we want to introduce mutex lock for >>> writes in other drivers as well? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Gargi >>>> >>>>> **/ >>>>> struct ade7753_state { >>>>> - struct spi_device *us; >>>>> - struct mutex buf_lock; >>>>> - u8 tx[ADE7753_MAX_TX] ____cacheline_aligned; >>>>> - u8 rx[ADE7753_MAX_RX]; >>>>> + struct spi_device *us; >>>>> + struct mutex buf_lock; >>>>> + struct mutex lock; /* protect sensor state */ >>>>> + u8 tx[ADE7753_MAX_TX] ____cacheline_aligned; >>>>> + u8 rx[ADE7753_MAX_RX]; >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> static int ade7753_spi_write_reg_8(struct device *dev, >>>>> @@ -484,7 +486,7 @@ static ssize_t ade7753_write_frequency(struct device *dev, >>>>> if (!val) >>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>> >>>>> - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock); >>>>> + mutex_lock(&st->lock); >>>>> >>>>> t = 27900 / val; >>>>> if (t > 0) >>>>> @@ -505,7 +507,7 @@ static ssize_t ade7753_write_frequency(struct device *dev, >>>>> ret = ade7753_spi_write_reg_16(dev, ADE7753_MODE, reg); >>>>> >>>>> out: >>>>> - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock); >>>>> + mutex_unlock(&st->lock); >>>>> >>>>> return ret ? ret : len; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>> >> _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel