Le 12/12/2024 à 08:01, Ming Yu a écrit :
Dear Christophe,
Thank you for your comments,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet-39ZsbGIQGT5GWvitb5QawA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 於 2024年12月12日 週四 上午12:44寫道：
+int nct6694_read_msg(struct nct6694 *nct6694, u8 mod, u16 offset,
+ u16 length, void *buf)
+{
+ struct nct6694_cmd_header *cmd_header = nct6694->cmd_header;
+ struct nct6694_response_header *response_header = nct6694->response_header;
+ struct usb_device *udev = nct6694->udev;
+ int tx_len, rx_len, ret;
+
+ guard(mutex)(&nct6694->access_lock);
Nitpick: This could be moved a few lines below, should it still comply
with your coding style.
I think the lock should be placed here to prevent the cmd_header from
being overwritten by another caller.
Could you share your perspective on this?
You are right, I misread the code :(
(I though cmd_header was a local structure)
+
+ /* Send command packet to USB device */
+ cmd_header->mod = mod;
+ cmd_header->cmd = offset & 0xFF;
+ cmd_header->sel = (offset >> 8) & 0xFF;
+ cmd_header->hctrl = NCT6694_HCTRL_GET;
+ cmd_header->len = length;
CJ
