On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 16:40 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

On Mon, 25 May 2020 14:38:55 +0300
Alexandru Ardelean [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>

This patch should be squashed into the first one, as the first one is
breaking the build (intentionally) to make the IIO core files easier to
review.

Signed-off-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <redacted>
---

Friend poke.  Version log?

Version log is in the first patch.
I was wondering if I omitted it.
Seems, this time I didn't. But I admit, it probably would have been better
here.

Other than the wistful comment below (which I'm not expecting you to
do anything about btw!) whole series looks good to me.

These are obviously no functional changes (I think) so it's only really
patch 2 that
could do with more eyes and acks.

Far as I can tell that case is fine as well because of the protections
on being in the right mode, but more eyes on that would be great.

So assuming that's fine, what commit message do you want me to use for
the fused single patch?

Commit message-wise: I think the message in the first commit would be
mostly sufficient.
No idea what other description would be needed.

So, maybe something like:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
All devices using a triggered buffer need to attach and detach the trigger
to the device in order to properly work. Instead of doing this in each and
every driver by hand move this into the core.

At this point in time, all drivers should have been resolved to
attach/detach the poll-function in the same order.

This patch removes all explicit calls of iio_triggered_buffer_postenable()
& iio_triggered_buffer_predisable() in all drivers, since the core handles
now the pollfunc attach/detach.

The more peculiar change is for the 'at91-sama5d2_adc' driver, since it's
not obvious that removing the hooks doesn't break anything**
----------------------------------------------------------------------

** for the comment about 'at91-sama5d2_adc', we really do need to get some
testing; otherwise this risks breaking it.

Thanks,

Jonathan

quoted

 static const struct iio_trigger_ops atlas_interrupt_trigger_ops = {

diff --git a/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c

b/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c
index 17606eca42b4..8e13c53d4360 100644

--- a/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/dummy/iio_simple_dummy_buffer.c

@@ -99,20 +99,6 @@ static irqreturn_t iio_simple_dummy_trigger_h(int

irq, void *p)
 }
 
 static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops
iio_simple_dummy_buffer_setup_ops = {
-	/*
-	 * iio_triggered_buffer_postenable:
-	 * Generic function that simply attaches the pollfunc to the
trigger.
-	 * Replace this to mess with hardware state before we attach the
-	 * trigger.
-	 */
-	.postenable = &iio_triggered_buffer_postenable,
-	/*
-	 * iio_triggered_buffer_predisable:
-	 * Generic function that simple detaches the pollfunc from the
trigger.
-	 * Replace this to put hardware state back again after the trigger
is
-	 * detached but before userspace knows we have disabled the ring.
-	 */
-	.predisable = &iio_triggered_buffer_predisable,
 };
 

Hmm. Guess we should probably 'invent' a reason to illustrate the bufer
ops in the dummy example.  Anyone feeling creative?

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel