On 04/09/2024 06:47, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Using guard notation makes the code more compact and error handling
> more robust by ensuring that mutexes are released in all code paths
> when control leaves critical section.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c | 46 +++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c b/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
> index 843f8a3f3410..c34d847fa4af 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/iqs269a.c
...
> @@ -453,9 +449,9 @@ static int iqs269_ati_base_get(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
> if (ch_num >= IQS269_NUM_CH)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - mutex_lock(&iqs269->lock);
> + guard(mutex)(&iqs269->lock);
> +
> engine_b = be16_to_cpu(ch_reg[ch_num].engine_b);
maybe scoped_guard() to keep the scope of the mutex as it used to be?
> - mutex_unlock(&iqs269->lock);
>
> switch (engine_b & IQS269_CHx_ENG_B_ATI_BASE_MASK) {
> case IQS269_CHx_ENG_B_ATI_BASE_75:
> @@ -491,7 +487,7 @@ static int iqs269_ati_target_set(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
> if (target > IQS269_CHx_ENG_B_ATI_TARGET_MAX)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - mutex_lock(&iqs269->lock);
> + guard(mutex)(&iqs269->lock);
>
> engine_b = be16_to_cpu(ch_reg[ch_num].engine_b);
>
> @@ -501,8 +497,6 @@ static int iqs269_ati_target_set(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
> ch_reg[ch_num].engine_b = cpu_to_be16(engine_b);
> iqs269->ati_current = false;
>
> - mutex_unlock(&iqs269->lock);
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -515,10 +509,9 @@ static int iqs269_ati_target_get(struct iqs269_private *iqs269,
> if (ch_num >= IQS269_NUM_CH)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - mutex_lock(&iqs269->lock);
> - engine_b = be16_to_cpu(ch_reg[ch_num].engine_b);
> - mutex_unlock(&iqs269->lock);
> + guard(mutex)(&iqs269->lock);
same here?
>
> + engine_b = be16_to_cpu(ch_reg[ch_num].engine_b);
> *target = (engine_b & IQS269_CHx_ENG_B_ATI_TARGET_MASK) * 32;
>
> return 0;
Best regards,
Javier Carrasco
