On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 01:29:21 +0100
Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Introduce the new linux/cleanup.h with the guard(mutex) functionality
> in the {read/write}_raw() functions
>
> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c | 125 +++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c
> index 871b2214121b..f7a13ff6f26c 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c
> @@ -460,77 +460,74 @@ static int bmp280_read_humid(struct bmp280_data *data, int *val, int *val2)
> return IIO_VAL_INT;
> }
>
> -static int bmp280_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> - struct iio_chan_spec const *chan,
> - int *val, int *val2, long mask)
> +static int bmp280_read_raw_guarded(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
Why do we need the guarded naming? It always took the lock, no
change just because we are doing that in a neater fashion.
I don't see a reason for that name. Better to use something like
_impl, or _internal as the prefix.
I don't want to see people calling every function that uses guard
_guarded().
> + struct iio_chan_spec const *chan,
> + int *val, int *val2, long mask)
Otherwise, I didn't find anything beyond what Andy already pointed out.
So looks good in general.
Jonathan
