On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 14:52 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 1:11 PM Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 11:54 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 11:05 AM Peng Wu <wupeng58@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > In the success path of iio_device_claim_buffer_mode(), > > > > mutex_unlock() > > > > should be called before return. > > > > > > Please, understand how the code works. > > > NAK. > > > > > > Nuno, perhaps we need to put a comment inside the function to > > > explain > > > this? > > > > > > > Hmm... I guess we can do that but, honestly, the docs in the > > function > > should be pretty straight. Maybe saying that it's supposed to work > > as > > iio_device_claim_direct_mode() would help (as that one is > > familiar)... > > > > Alternatively, having sparse annotations could also make it more > > easy > > to understand the intent. > > Maybe simply > > /* Yes, we leave it locked here */ > > before return 0; would suffice? Yes, I think so... - Nuno Sá
