Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: [patch 2.6.31-rc7] gpiolib: allow poll() on value

Posted by Andrew Morton 
Andrew Morton
Re: [patch 2.6.31-rc7] gpiolib: allow poll() on value
September 01, 2009 10:50PM
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:50:57 -0700
David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Daniel Gl__ckner <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH v3] gpiolib: allow poll(2) on gpio value
>
> Many gpio chips allow to generate interrupts when the value of a pin
> changes. This patch gives usermode application the opportunity to make
> use of this feature by calling poll(2) on the /sys/class/gpio/gpioN/value
> sysfs file. The edge to trigger can be set in the edge file in the same
> directory. Possible values are "none", "rising", "falling", and "both".
>
> Using level triggers is not possible with current sysfs since nothing
> changes the GPIO value (and the IRQ keeps triggering). Edge triggering
> will "just work". Note that if there was an event between read() and
> poll(), the poll() returns immediately.
>
> Also note that this version only supports true GPIO interrupts. Some
> later patch might be able to synthesize this behavior by timer-driven
> polling; some systems seem to need that.
>
> ...
>
> +static struct idr pdesc_idr;

There's no locking to protect this tree. If that isn't a bug then I'd
suggest that a comment be added here explaining why.

> +static irqreturn_t gpio_sysfs_irq(int irq, void *priv)
> +{
> + struct work_struct *work = priv;
> +
> + schedule_work(work);
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}

The only place where we explicitly cancel the pending work is in
gpio_setup_irq(). Is that sufficient? Is there any way in which the
work callback can occur after things have been
freed/closed/deinitialised/etc?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
David Brownell
Re: [patch 2.6.31-rc7] gpiolib: allow poll() on value
September 02, 2009 06:40AM
On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > +static struct idr pdesc_idr;
>
> There's no locking to protect this tree.  If that isn't a bug then I'd
> suggest that a comment be added here explaining why.

Covered by mutex_lock(&sysfs_lock) calls per a quick re-read...


> > +static irqreturn_t gpio_sysfs_irq(int irq, void *priv)
> > +{
> > +     struct work_struct      *work = priv;
> > +
> > +     schedule_work(work);
> > +     return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
>
> The only place where we explicitly cancel the pending work is in
> gpio_setup_irq().  Is that sufficient?  Is there any way in which the
> work callback can occur after things have been
> freed/closed/deinitialised/etc?

Not that I noticed; it's not supposed to be possible to
free/etc with IRQs active.

- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login