From: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
[ Upstream commit 0fe2f2b789190661df24bb8bf62294145729a1fe ]
The iio_triggered_buffer_{predisable,postenable} functions attach/detach
the poll functions.
For the predisable hook, the disable code should occur before detaching
the poll func, and for the postenable hook, the poll func should be
attached before the enable code.
The driver was slightly reworked. The preenable hook was moved to the
postenable, to add some symmetry to the postenable/predisable part.
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c b/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
index 7c0291c5fe76e..b542e5619ead8 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
@@ -240,32 +240,42 @@ static const struct iio_info tcs3414_info = {
.attrs = &tcs3414_attribute_group,
};
-static int tcs3414_buffer_preenable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
+static int tcs3414_buffer_postenable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
{
struct tcs3414_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = iio_triggered_buffer_postenable(indio_dev);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
data->control |= TCS3414_CONTROL_ADC_EN;
- return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
+ ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
data->control);
+ if (ret)
+ iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
+
+ return ret;
}
static int tcs3414_buffer_predisable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
{
struct tcs3414_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
- int ret;
-
- ret = iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
- if (ret < 0)
- return ret;
+ int ret, ret2;
data->control &= ~TCS3414_CONTROL_ADC_EN;
- return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
+ ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
data->control);
+
+ ret2 = iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
+ if (!ret)
+ ret = ret2;
+
+ return ret;
}
static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops tcs3414_buffer_setup_ops = {
- .preenable = tcs3414_buffer_preenable,
- .postenable = &iio_triggered_buffer_postenable,
+ .postenable = tcs3414_buffer_postenable,
.predisable = tcs3414_buffer_predisable,
};
--
2.20.1
On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:58:31 -0500
Sasha Levin <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit 0fe2f2b789190661df24bb8bf62294145729a1fe ]
>
> The iio_triggered_buffer_{predisable,postenable} functions attach/detach
> the poll functions.
>
> For the predisable hook, the disable code should occur before detaching
> the poll func, and for the postenable hook, the poll func should be
> attached before the enable code.
>
> The driver was slightly reworked. The preenable hook was moved to the
> postenable, to add some symmetry to the postenable/predisable part.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
I doubt this did any harm, but wouldn't consider it stable material normally.
This is part of a general rework going on to allow some core refactoring.
I should have added a note to this one like some related patches that it
is a logical fix, but we don't have an actual known bug afaik.
Sorry about that.
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c b/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
> index 7c0291c5fe76e..b542e5619ead8 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/tcs3414.c
> @@ -240,32 +240,42 @@ static const struct iio_info tcs3414_info = {
> .attrs = &tcs3414_attribute_group,
> };
>
> -static int tcs3414_buffer_preenable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> +static int tcs3414_buffer_postenable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> {
> struct tcs3414_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = iio_triggered_buffer_postenable(indio_dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
>
> data->control |= TCS3414_CONTROL_ADC_EN;
> - return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
> + ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
> data->control);
> + if (ret)
> + iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static int tcs3414_buffer_predisable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> {
> struct tcs3414_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> - int ret;
> -
> - ret = iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> + int ret, ret2;
>
> data->control &= ~TCS3414_CONTROL_ADC_EN;
> - return i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
> + ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(data->client, TCS3414_CONTROL,
> data->control);
> +
> + ret2 = iio_triggered_buffer_predisable(indio_dev);
> + if (!ret)
> + ret = ret2;
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops tcs3414_buffer_setup_ops = {
> - .preenable = tcs3414_buffer_preenable,
> - .postenable = &iio_triggered_buffer_postenable,
> + .postenable = tcs3414_buffer_postenable,
> .predisable = tcs3414_buffer_predisable,
> };
>
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 03:52:03PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:58:31 -0500
>Sasha Levin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 0fe2f2b789190661df24bb8bf62294145729a1fe ]
>>
>> The iio_triggered_buffer_{predisable,postenable} functions attach/detach
>> the poll functions.
>>
>> For the predisable hook, the disable code should occur before detaching
>> the poll func, and for the postenable hook, the poll func should be
>> attached before the enable code.
>>
>> The driver was slightly reworked. The preenable hook was moved to the
>> postenable, to add some symmetry to the postenable/predisable part.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
>I doubt this did any harm, but wouldn't consider it stable material normally.
>
>This is part of a general rework going on to allow some core refactoring.
>
>I should have added a note to this one like some related patches that it
>is a logical fix, but we don't have an actual known bug afaik.
I'll drop it from everywhere, thanks!
--
Thanks,
Sasha