lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 10/16] iio: adc: max1027: Prevent single channel accesses during buffer reads
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sa, Nuno <Nuno.Sa@analog.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2021 9:21 AM
> To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>; Jonathan Cameron
> <jic23@kernel.org>; Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>; linux-
> iio@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 10/16] iio: adc: max1027: Prevent single channel
> accesses during buffer reads
>
> [External]
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2021 1:12 PM
> > To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>; Lars-Peter Clausen
> > <lars@metafoo.de>
> > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>; linux-
> > iio@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Miquel Raynal
> > <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH 10/16] iio: adc: max1027: Prevent single channel
> > accesses during buffer reads
> >
> > [External]
> >
> > When hardware buffers are enabled (the cnvst pin being the
> trigger),
> > one
> > should not mess with the device state by requesting a single channel
> > read. Prevent it with a iio_buffer_enabled() check.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c b/drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c
> > index 223c9e4abd86..83526f3d7d3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c
> > @@ -335,6 +335,8 @@ static int max1027_read_raw(struct iio_dev
> > *indio_dev,
> >
> > switch (mask) {
> > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
> > + if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev))
> > + return -EBUSY;
>
> I guess 'iio_device_claim_direct_mode()' would be a better option
> here? There's nothing preventing this check to pass and then,
> concurrently
> someone enables the buffer...
>

Taking a second look, it seems that this check is already done [1]? Am I missing
I missing something?

Also, I think we are returning with the 'st->lock' held...

[1]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/iio/adc/max1027.c#L247
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-08-20 09:31    [W:0.092 / U:0.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site