UIO: fixes, cleanups and a new driver
Subsystems (2)
cover UIO: fixes, cleanups and a new driver
Hello,
in this series you can find a generic platform_device driver for UIO and a few cleanups and fixes to the existing UIO code. The first patch fixes a possible Oops.
Below you can find shortlog and diffstat.
I appreciate any (constructive) feedback.
Best regards
Uwe
Uwe Kleine-König (4):
UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
UIO: use menuconfig
UIO: wrap all uio drivers in "if UIO" and "endif"
[RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 19 ++++-- drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio.c | 40 +++++++----- drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 202 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
PATCH 1/4 UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Otherwise the device might just disappear while /dev/uioX is being used which results in an Oops.
--- drivers/uio/uio.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/uio.c +23 -17
@@ -301,25 +301,35 @@ static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)if (!idev)return -ENODEV ; +if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) { + ret = -ENODEV ; + goto err_module_get; + } + listener =kmalloc (sizeof (*listener),GFP_KERNEL ); -if (!listener) -return -ENOMEM ; +if (!listener) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; + goto err_alloc_listener; + } listener->dev = idev; listener->event_count =atomic_read (&idev->event); filep->private_data = listener;if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } +if (ret) { +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: -if (ret) -kfree (listener); +module_put (idev->owner); +err_module_get: -return ret; +return ret; + } + } + +return 0 ; }static int uio_fasync (int fd,struct file *filep,int on)
@@ -336,12 +346,11 @@ static int uio_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)struct uio_listener *listener = filep->private_data;struct uio_device *idev = listener->dev; -if (idev->info->release) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; +if (idev->info->release) ret = idev->info->release (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } + +module_put (idev->owner); +if (filep->f_flags &FASYNC ) ret =uio_fasync (-1 , filep,0 );kfree (listener);
@@ -510,10 +519,7 @@ static int uio_mmap(struct file *filep, struct vm_area_struct *vma)return -EINVAL ;if (idev->info->mmap) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->mmap (idev->info, vma); -module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }
Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
PATCH 2/4 UIO: use menuconfig
This allows configuring CONFIG_UIO without changing into the UIO submenu
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 8 ++------ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/Kconfig +2 -6
@@ -1,9 +1,7 @@ -menu "Userspace I/O" - depends on !S390 - -config UIO +menuconfig UIO tristate "Userspace I/O drivers" default n + depends on !S390 help Enable this to allow the userspace driver core code to be built. This code allows userspace programs easy access to
@@ -25,5 +23,3 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. - -endmenu
Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
PATCH 3/4 UIO: wrap all uio drivers in "if UIO" and "endif"
currently there is only one driver, but new entries don't need to depend explicitly on UIO.
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/Kconfig +5 -1
@@ -11,9 +11,11 @@ menuconfig UIO If you don't know what to do here, say N. +if UIO + config UIO_CIF tristate "generic Hilscher CIF Card driver" - depends on UIO && PCI + depends on PCI default n help Driver for Hilscher CIF DeviceNet and Profibus cards. This
@@ -23,3 +25,5 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. + +endif
Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
RFC PATCH 4/4 UIO: generic platform driver
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7 -0
@@ -26,4 +26,11 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + endif
drivers/uio/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.o
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +165 -0
165 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
Hi Uwe,
I'm a bit slow today, I don't really understand what this is good for. It's to complicated to serve as a template, and it doesn't support interrupts, so it's not good for any real device, too. So the only usecase would be an irq-less platform_device that just needs its memory mapped. Is this what you intended? What do _you_ use it for?
Thanks,
Hans
Quoted 198 lines
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7
-0@@ -26,4 +26,11 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + endifdrivers/uio/Makefile +1
-0@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.odrivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +165
-0@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +/* +* drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c +* +* Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc. +* All rights reserved. +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it +* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by +* the Free Software Foundation. +*/ +#include <linux/clk.h> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/uio_driver.h> + +#define DRIVER_NAME "uio" + +/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not +* find it ... +*/ +#ifndef STRINGIFY +#define STRINGIFY (x) __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x) +#define __STRINGIFY_HELPER (x) #x +#endif + +struct uio_platdata { +struct uio_info *uioinfo; +struct clk *clk; +}; + +static int uio_pdrv_open (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; +int ret; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info); + + ret =clk_enable (pdata->clk); +if (ret) +/* XXX: better use dev_dbg, but which device should I use? +* info->uio_dev->dev isn't accessible here as struct uio_device +* is opaque. +*/ +pr_debug ("%s: err_clk_enable -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + +return ret; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_release (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info); + +clk_disable (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_info *uioinfo = pdev->dev.platform_data; +struct uio_platdata *pdata; +struct uio_mem *uiomem; +int ret = -ENODEV ; +int i; + +if (!uioinfo || !uioinfo->name || !uioinfo->version) { +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_uioinfo\n" , __func__); + goto err_uioinfo; + } + + pdata =kzalloc (sizeof (*pdata),GFP_KERNEL ); +if (!pdata) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_alloc_pdata\n" , __func__); + goto err_alloc_pdata; + } + + pdata->uioinfo = uioinfo; + + pdata->clk =clk_get (&pdev->dev,DRIVER_NAME ); +if (IS_ERR (pdata->clk)) { + ret =PTR_ERR (pdata->clk); +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_clk_get -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + goto err_clk_get; + } + + uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0 ]; + +for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i]; + +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) { + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + STRINGIFY(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" ); +break ; + } + + uiomem->memtype =UIO_MEM_PHYS ; + uiomem->addr = r->start; + uiomem->size = r->end - r->start +1 ; + ++uiomem; + } + + pdata->uioinfo->open = uio_pdrv_open; + pdata->uioinfo->release = uio_pdrv_release; + pdata->uioinfo->priv = pdata; + + ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo); + +if (ret) { +clk_put (pdata->clk); +err_clk_get: + +kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + } + +platform_set_drvdata (pdev, pdata); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_remove (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata =platform_get_drvdata (pdev); + +uio_unregister_device (pdata->uioinfo); + +clk_put (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct platform_driver uio_pdrv = { + .probe = uio_pdrv_probe, + .remove = uio_pdrv_remove, + .driver = { + .name =DRIVER_NAME , + .owner =THIS_MODULE , + }, +}; + +static int __init uio_pdrv_init (void ) +{ +return platform_driver_register (&uio_pdrv); +} + +static void __exit uio_pdrv_exit(void) +{ +platform_driver_unregister (&uio_pdrv); +} +module_init (uio_pdrv_init); +module_exit (uio_pdrv_exit); + +MODULE_AUTHOR ("Uwe Kleine-Koenig" ); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION ("Userspace I/O platform driver" ); +MODULE_LICENSE ("GPL" ); +MODULE_ALIAS ("platform:" DRIVER_NAME );Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Hans,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
Quoted 5 lines
I'm a bit slow today, I don't really understand what this is good for. It's to complicated to serve as a template, and it doesn't support interrupts, so it's not good for any real device, too. So the only usecase would be an irq-less
platform_devicethat just needs its memory mapped. Is this what you intended? What do _you_ use it for?
In my use case I don't use an irq, but you're free to provide a handler when you create the platform device. Attached is the file that provides an uio platform device. Current vanilla's support for ns9xxx isn't (yet) complete enough to compile that, but you should be able to see how it works.
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
/*
* arch/arm/mach-ns9xxx/plat-uio.c
*
* Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc.
* All rights reserved.
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by
* the Free Software Foundation.
*/
#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/platform_device.h>
#include <linux/uio_driver.h>
#include <asm/mach-types.h>
#include "clock.h"
#define DRIVER_NAME "uio"
struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata {
struct uio_info uioinfo;
struct clk clk;
};static struct platform_device *__init ns9xxx_plat_uio_alloc(
struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata **pdata)
{
struct platform_device *pdev;
static int id;
BUG_ON(!pdata);
pdev = platform_device_alloc(DRIVER_NAME, id);
if (!pdev)
goto err;
*pdata = kzalloc(sizeof(**pdata), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!*pdata) {
err:
platform_device_put(pdev);
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
}
(*pdata)->clk.owner = THIS_MODULE;
(*pdata)->clk.name = DRIVER_NAME;
(*pdata)->clk.id = id;
pdev->dev.platform_data = *pdata;
++id;
return pdev;
}static int __init ns9xxx_plat_uio_inc20otter_init(void)
{
struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata *uninitialized_var(pdata);
struct platform_device *pdev = ns9xxx_plat_uio_alloc(&pdata);
struct resource res[] = {
{
.start = 0x70000000,
.end = 0x70001fff,
.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
}, {
.start = 0xa0700000,
.end = 0xa070027b,
.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
}
};
int ret;
if (IS_ERR(pdev)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(pdev);
pr_debug("%s: err_alloc_pdev -> %d\n", __func__, ret);
goto err_alloc_pdev;
}
ret = platform_device_add_resources(pdev, res, ARRAY_SIZE(res));
if (ret) {
pr_debug("%s: err_add_resources -> %d\n", __func__, ret);
goto err_add_resources;
}
ret = clk_register(&pdata->clk);
if (ret) {
pr_debug("%s: err_clk_register -> %d", __func__, ret);
goto err_clk_register;
}
pdata->uioinfo.name = "inc20otter CS3";
pdata->uioinfo.version = "0.0a";
pdata->uioinfo.irq = UIO_IRQ_NONE;
ret = platform_device_add(pdev);
if (ret) {
clk_unregister(&pdata->clk);err_clk_register:err_add_resources:
/* this kfrees pdata, too */ platform_device_put(pdev); err_alloc_pdev: return ret; } return 0; }
static int __init ns9xxx_plat_uio_init(void)
{
if (machine_is_inc20otter())
ns9xxx_plat_uio_inc20otter_init();
return 0;
}arch_initcall(ns9xxx_plat_uio_init);
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 12 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello Hans,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
I'm a bit slow today, I don't really understand what this is good for. It's to complicated to serve as a template, and it doesn't support interrupts, so it's not good for any real device, too. So the only usecase would be an irq-less
platform_devicethat just needs its memory mapped. Is this what you intended? What do _you_ use it for?In my use case I don't use an irq, but you're free to provide a handler when you create the platform device.
Hmm, I get the idea. You could have a UIO driver for a platform device just by setting up a struct in the board support file. Nice thought.
Hmm. It's late, let me sleep over it... Tomorrow I'll look at it again.
Thanks,
Hans
Quoted 133 lines
Attached is the file that provides
an uio platform device. Current vanilla's support for ns9xxx isn't (yet) complete enough to compile that, but you should be able to see how it works.Best regards
UweSignature · 124 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962 /* * arch/arm/mach-ns9xxx/plat-uio.c * * Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc. * All rights reserved. * * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by * the Free Software Foundation. */ #include <linux/err.h> #include <linux/platform_device.h> #include <linux/uio_driver.h> #include <asm/mach-types.h> #include "clock.h" #define DRIVER_NAME "uio" struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata { struct uio_info uioinfo; struct clk clk; }; static struct platform_device *__init ns9xxx_plat_uio_alloc( struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata **pdata) { struct platform_device *pdev; static int id; BUG_ON(!pdata); pdev = platform_device_alloc(DRIVER_NAME, id); if (!pdev) goto err; *pdata = kzalloc(sizeof(**pdata), GFP_KERNEL); if (!*pdata) { err: platform_device_put(pdev); return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); } (*pdata)->clk.owner = THIS_MODULE; (*pdata)->clk.name = DRIVER_NAME; (*pdata)->clk.id = id; pdev->dev.platform_data = *pdata; ++id; return pdev; } static int __init ns9xxx_plat_uio_inc20otter_init(void) { struct ns9xxx_uio_platdata *uninitialized_var(pdata); struct platform_device *pdev = ns9xxx_plat_uio_alloc(&pdata); struct resource res[] = { { .start = 0x70000000, .end = 0x70001fff, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, { .start = 0xa0700000, .end = 0xa070027b, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, } }; int ret; if (IS_ERR(pdev)) { ret = PTR_ERR(pdev); pr_debug("%s: err_alloc_pdev -> %d\n", __func__, ret); goto err_alloc_pdev; } ret = platform_device_add_resources(pdev, res, ARRAY_SIZE(res)); if (ret) { pr_debug("%s: err_add_resources -> %d\n", __func__, ret); goto err_add_resources; } ret = clk_register(&pdata->clk); if (ret) { pr_debug("%s: err_clk_register -> %d", __func__, ret); goto err_clk_register; } pdata->uioinfo.name = "inc20otter CS3"; pdata->uioinfo.version = "0.0a"; pdata->uioinfo.irq = UIO_IRQ_NONE; ret = platform_device_add(pdev); if (ret) { clk_unregister(&pdata->clk); err_clk_register: err_add_resources: /* this kfrees pdata, too */ platform_device_put(pdev); err_alloc_pdev: return ret; } return 0; } static int __init ns9xxx_plat_uio_init(void) { if (machine_is_inc20otter()) ns9xxx_plat_uio_inc20otter_init(); return 0; } arch_initcall(ns9xxx_plat_uio_init);
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 10 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 5 lines
I'm a bit slow today, I don't really understand what this is good for. It's to complicated to serve as a template, and it doesn't support interrupts, so it's not good for any real device, too. So the only usecase would be an irq-less
platform_devicethat just needs its memory mapped. Is this what you intended? What do _you_ use it for?
I've seen this kind of thing hacked up by a few people already, mainly as a replacement for /dev/mem. Many people are being scared off using /dev/mem (and rightly so) because
- They've seen discussions regarding future plans whereby /dev/mem wouldn't be allowed access to physical memory
- They don't have anything like X forcing them to have /dev/mem and therefore want to disable it completely for (perceived?) security reasons.
I like it, it'll sure be used.
--Ben.
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
I looked it over again. Some comments below.
I'm beginning to like the idea...
Hans
Quoted 40 lines
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7
-0@@ -26,4 +26,11 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + endifdrivers/uio/Makefile +1
-0@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.odrivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +9
-0@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +/* +* drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c +* +* Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc. +* All rights reserved. +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it +* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by +* the Free Software Foundation.
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 19
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +10
-0+*/ +#include <linux/clk.h> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/uio_driver.h> + +#define DRIVER_NAME "uio" + +/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not +* find it ... +*/
Why do you want that macro? You only use it once. The macro definition and the comment above are more than you can ever expect to save with it.
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +6
-0+#ifndef STRINGIFY +#define STRINGIFY (x) __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x) +#define __STRINGIFY_HELPER (x) #x +#endif + +struct uio_platdata {
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 35
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +10
-0+struct uio_info *uioinfo; +struct clk *clk; +}; + +static int uio_pdrv_open (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; +int ret; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info);
How can this BUG ever be triggered?
Quoted 46 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +46
-0+ + ret =clk_enable (pdata->clk); +if (ret) +/* XXX: better use dev_dbg, but which device should I use? +* info->uio_dev->dev isn't accessible here as struct uio_device +* is opaque. +*/ +pr_debug ("%s: err_clk_enable -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + +return ret; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_release (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info); + +clk_disable (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_info *uioinfo = pdev->dev.platform_data; +struct uio_platdata *pdata; +struct uio_mem *uiomem; +int ret = -ENODEV ; +int i; + +if (!uioinfo || !uioinfo->name || !uioinfo->version) { +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_uioinfo\n" , __func__); + goto err_uioinfo; + } + + pdata =kzalloc (sizeof (*pdata),GFP_KERNEL ); +if (!pdata) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_alloc_pdata\n" , __func__); + goto err_alloc_pdata; + } + + pdata->uioinfo = uioinfo; + + pdata->clk =clk_get (&pdev->dev,DRIVER_NAME );
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +10
-0+if (IS_ERR (pdata->clk)) { + ret =PTR_ERR (pdata->clk); +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_clk_get -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + goto err_clk_get; + } + + uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0 ]; + +for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];
Please don't define new variables in the middle of a function.
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 96
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +5
-0+ +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) {
I'd prefer this:
if (i >= MAX_UIO_MAPS) {
...drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 99
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +3
-0+ dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + STRINGIFY(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" );
What about this:
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than %d" " I/O memory resources.\n", MAX_UIO_MAPS);
would save the macro.
Quoted 14 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +14
-0+break ; + } + + uiomem->memtype =UIO_MEM_PHYS ; + uiomem->addr = r->start; + uiomem->size = r->end - r->start +1 ; + ++uiomem; + } + + pdata->uioinfo->open = uio_pdrv_open; + pdata->uioinfo->release = uio_pdrv_release; + pdata->uioinfo->priv = pdata; + + ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo);
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 123
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +10
-0+ +if (ret) { +clk_put (pdata->clk); +err_clk_get: + +kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + }
How I hate labels within blocks... OK, I admit, it looks good here... Well...
Quoted 44 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +42
-0+ +platform_set_drvdata (pdev, pdata); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_remove (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata =platform_get_drvdata (pdev); + +uio_unregister_device (pdata->uioinfo); + +clk_put (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct platform_driver uio_pdrv = { + .probe = uio_pdrv_probe, + .remove = uio_pdrv_remove, + .driver = { + .name =DRIVER_NAME , + .owner =THIS_MODULE , + }, +}; + +static int __init uio_pdrv_init (void ) +{ +return platform_driver_register (&uio_pdrv); +} + +static void __exit uio_pdrv_exit(void) +{ +platform_driver_unregister (&uio_pdrv); +} +module_init (uio_pdrv_init); +module_exit (uio_pdrv_exit); + +MODULE_AUTHOR ("Uwe Kleine-Koenig" ); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION ("Userspace I/O platform driver" ); +MODULE_LICENSE ("GPL" ); +MODULE_ALIAS ("platform:" DRIVER_NAME );Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Hans,
Quoted 6 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines
+/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not
+ * find it ...
+ */Why do you want that macro? You only use it once. The macro definition and the comment above are more than you can ever expect to save with it.
See below.
BTW, I found it, it's in linux/stringify.h. And there are several possible users:
ukleinek@zentaur:~/gsrc/linux-2.6$ git ls-files -z | xargs -0 perl -n -e 'print "$ARGV\n" if (/define\s+\w+\((\w+)\)\s*#\s*$1/)' arch/arm/vfp/vfpinstr.h arch/cris/arch-v10/boot/tools/build.c arch/m68k/lib/checksum.c arch/mips/kernel/unaligned.c arch/powerpc/boot/reg.h arch/um/drivers/mconsole_user.c arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/kernel-offsets.h arch/um/include/sysdep-x86_64/kernel-offsets.h arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_32.c drivers/atm/ambassador.c drivers/media/video/cpia2/cpia2_v4l.c drivers/mtd/maps/amd76xrom.c drivers/mtd/maps/ichxrom.c drivers/s390/cio/qdio.h drivers/scsi/aacraid/aacraid.h drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c drivers/scsi/arm/acornscsi.c drivers/scsi/g_NCR5380.h drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c drivers/usb/serial/garmin_gps.c include/asm-cris/arch-v10/irq.h include/asm-cris/arch-v32/hwregs/supp_reg.h include/asm-cris/arch-v32/irq.h include/asm-m32r/assembler.h include/asm-m68k/entry.h include/asm-mips/mipsregs.h include/asm-mips/sim.h include/asm-sh/cpu-sh5/registers.h include/asm-v850/macrology.h include/linux/stringify.h include/sound/core.h sound/core/memalloc.c usr/gen_init_cpio.c
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 35
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +6
-0+static int uio_pdrv_open (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; +int ret; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info);How can this BUG ever be triggered?
I hope it cannot, that's why it is a bug if it happens. :-) And one should expect that no BUG_ON should ever be triggered. I usually use BUG_ON for "declaring" preconditions.
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];Please don't define new variables in the middle of a function.
This is a matter of taste. In my eyes it's better to declare it here because then it's easier to see where it's used.
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 96
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +5
-0+ +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) {I'd prefer this:
if (i >= MAX_UIO_MAPS) { ...
OK.
BTW would you be open to redefine uio_info as:
struct uio_info {
struct uio_device *uio_dev;
...
size_t num_memmaps;
struct uio_mem mem[];
}This allows to allocate exactly the number of members in the mem array that are needed (for the cost of a size_t). (You just do:
uio_info uioinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(*uioinfo) + num_memmaps * sizeof(uioinfo->mem[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
it's still one chunk of memory and usage is similar---just with MAX_UIO_MAPS substituted by uioinfo->num_memmaps.)
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 99
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +3
-0+ dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + STRINGIFY(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" );What about this:
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than %d" " I/O memory resources.\n", MAX_UIO_MAPS);would save the macro.
The macro is for free, using "%d" is not:
ukleinek@zentaur:~/kbuild-ns921x$ size drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_with* text data bss dec hex filename 808 72 0 880 370 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_withoutstringify.o 800 72 0 872 368 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_withstringify.o
You might consider that a bit over-engineered :-)
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +6
-0+ ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo); + +if (ret) { +clk_put (pdata->clk); +err_clk_get: +
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 123
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +5
-0+kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + }How I hate labels within blocks... OK, I admit, it looks good here... Well...
That's a matter of taste, too, I like it that way. Probably it doesn't matter for the compiler (I havn't tried), but this way it's one goto less. And if it doesn't matter for the compiler it's at least nice for the reader. Though obviously YMMV.
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
RFC PATCH v2 4/4 UIO: generic platform driver
---
Hello,
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 11 lines
Review
Quoted 7 lines
(quoted diff) +7
-0+ for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { + struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i]; + + if (r->flags != IORESOURCE_MEM) + continue; + + if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS]) {I'd prefer this:
if (i >= MAX_UIO_MAPS) { ...
Quoted 1 line
OK.
While reworking the code I saw that your variant is not correct because if pdev has resources with flags != IORESOURCE_MEM the constraint
uiomem == &uioinfo->mem[i]
doesn't hold.
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Best regards
Uwe
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 171 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7 -0
@@ -26,4 +26,11 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + endif
drivers/uio/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.o
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +163 -0
163 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 8 lines
1.5.4.5 -- Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Thanks, but it doesn't compile, neither with -rc8 nor with Linus' git.
One problem can easily be fixed, the macro is called __stringify, not stringify.
But what about this:
ERROR: "clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Against which kernel do you test?
Thanks,
Hans
Quoted 212 lines
Best regards
Uwedrivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 171 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.cdrivers/uio/Kconfig +7
-0@@ -26,4 +26,11 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + endifdrivers/uio/Makefile +1
-0@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.odrivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +163
-0@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@ +/* +* drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c +* +* Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc. +* All rights reserved. +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it +* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by +* the Free Software Foundation. +*/ +#include <linux/clk.h> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/uio_driver.h> +#include <linux/stringify.h> + +#define DRIVER_NAME "uio" + +struct uio_platdata { +struct uio_info *uioinfo; +struct clk *clk; +}; + +static int uio_pdrv_open (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; +int ret; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info); + + ret =clk_enable (pdata->clk); +if (ret) +/* XXX: better use dev_dbg, but which device should I use? +* info->uio_dev->dev isn't accessible here as struct uio_device +* is opaque. +*/ +pr_debug ("%s: err_clk_enable -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + +return ret; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_release (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info); + +clk_disable (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_info *uioinfo = pdev->dev.platform_data; +struct uio_platdata *pdata; +struct uio_mem *uiomem; +int ret = -ENODEV ; +int i; + +if (!uioinfo || !uioinfo->name || !uioinfo->version) { +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_uioinfo\n" , __func__); + goto err_uioinfo; + } + + pdata =kzalloc (sizeof (*pdata),GFP_KERNEL ); +if (!pdata) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_alloc_pdata\n" , __func__); + goto err_alloc_pdata; + } + + pdata->uioinfo = uioinfo; + + pdata->clk =clk_get (&pdev->dev,DRIVER_NAME ); +if (IS_ERR (pdata->clk)) { + ret =PTR_ERR (pdata->clk); +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_clk_get -> %d\n" , __func__, ret); + goto err_clk_get; + } + + uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0 ]; + +for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i]; + +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) { + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" ); +break ; + } + + uiomem->memtype =UIO_MEM_PHYS ; + uiomem->addr = r->start; + uiomem->size = r->end - r->start +1 ; + ++uiomem; + } + +while (uiomem < &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) { + uiomem->size =0 ; + ++uiomem; + } + + pdata->uioinfo->open = uio_pdrv_open; + pdata->uioinfo->release = uio_pdrv_release; + pdata->uioinfo->priv = pdata; + + ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo); + +if (ret) { +clk_put (pdata->clk); +err_clk_get: + +kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + } + +platform_set_drvdata (pdev, pdata); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_remove (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata =platform_get_drvdata (pdev); + +uio_unregister_device (pdata->uioinfo); + +clk_put (pdata->clk); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct platform_driver uio_pdrv = { + .probe = uio_pdrv_probe, + .remove = uio_pdrv_remove, + .driver = { + .name =DRIVER_NAME , + .owner =THIS_MODULE , + }, +}; + +static int __init uio_pdrv_init (void ) +{ +return platform_driver_register (&uio_pdrv); +} + +static void __exit uio_pdrv_exit(void) +{ +platform_driver_unregister (&uio_pdrv); +} +module_init (uio_pdrv_init); +module_exit (uio_pdrv_exit); + +MODULE_AUTHOR ("Uwe Kleine-Koenig" ); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION ("Userspace I/O platform driver" ); +MODULE_LICENSE ("GPL" ); +MODULE_ALIAS ("platform:" DRIVER_NAME );Signature · 8 lines
1.5.4.5 -- Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Thanks, but it doesn't compile, neither with -rc8 nor with Linus' git.
One problem can easily be fixed, the macro is called
__stringify, not stringify.
I just notice that, too. My mail address that and your's just crossed each other.
Quoted 8 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1]. I used it to allow enabling the device only when the device is opened. Typical things in the enable routine are enabling a clock or reserve and configure gpios etc.
A minimal dummy implementation that should work here is:
#define clk_get(dev, id) NULL #define clk_put(clk) ((void)0) #define clk_enable(clk) (1) #define clk_disable(clk) ((void)0)
Best regards
Uwe
[1] Try:
git ls-files -z | xargs -0 perl -n -e 'print "$ARGV\n" if /EXPORT_SYMBOL(?:_GPL)?\s*\(\s*clk_get\s*\)/;'
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 22 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Thanks, but it doesn't compile, neither with -rc8 nor with Linus' git.
One problem can easily be fixed, the macro is called
__stringify, not stringify.I just notice that, too. My mail address that and your's just crossed each other.
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added in Kconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).
Thanks,
Hans
Quoted 22 lines
I used it to allow enabling the device only when the device is opened. Typical things in the enable routine are enabling a clock or reserve and configure gpios etc.
A minimal dummy implementation that should work here is:
#define clk_get(dev, id) NULL #define clk_put(clk) ((void)0) #define clk_enable(clk) (1) #define clk_disable(clk) ((void)0)Best regards
Uwe[1] Try:
git ls-files -z | xargs -0 perl -n -e 'print "$ARGV\n" if /EXPORT_SYMBOL(?:_GPL)?\s*\(\s*clk_get\s*\)/;'Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello,
[Added Russell King to Cc:]
Quoted 29 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 22 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Thanks, but it doesn't compile, neither with -rc8 nor with Linus' git.
One problem can easily be fixed, the macro is called
__stringify, not stringify.I just notice that, too. My mail address that and your's just crossed each other.
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].
Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 38 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
[Added Russell King to Cc:]
Quoted 29 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 22 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Below is a new version that uses linux/stringify and zeros size for unused mappings (line 102ff).
Thanks, but it doesn't compile, neither with -rc8 nor with Linus' git.
One problem can easily be fixed, the macro is called
__stringify, not stringify.I just notice that, too. My mail address that and your's just crossed each other.
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).
Quoted 5 lines
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Only that the kernels Kconfig is turning into a real complicated mess of dependencies IMHO.
We could add a HAVE_CLK and add that to the dependency of all the drivers which use linux/clk.h. The problem will be finding all those drivers and their corresponding Kconfig entries.
My feeling is that we're just going to end up creating another Kconfig symbol which folk half-heartedly use.
[PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello,
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).Quoted 5 lines
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Only that the kernels
Kconfigis turning into a real complicated mess of dependencies IMHO.
Quoted 6 lines
We could add a
HAVE_CLKand add that to the dependency of all the drivers which uselinux/clk.h. The problem will be finding all those drivers and their correspondingKconfigentries.My feeling is that we're just going to end up creating another
Kconfigsymbol which folk half-heartedly use.
I don't like that either. What do you think about the patch below? It doesn't introduce a new symbol that needs much care and attention. This way the clk API is available on all configurations provided that CONFIG_DUMMY_CLK is set correctly. If CONFIG_DUMMY_CLK is set wrong it should result in a compile error. Either because there are two implementations of clk_get or none.
The condition on when to define DUMMY_CLK isn't yet perfect, but not defining it for a platform isn't a regression as there was no implementation before this patch either.
This could supersede the implementation in drivers/usb/gadget/pxa2xx_udc.c for IXP. (That driver obviously doesn't check if clk_enable() succeeded, because it's defined as:
#define clk_enable(clk) do { } while (0).)
Maybe it would be fine to make these functions inline and define them directly in linux/clk.h?
Best regards
Uwe
---->8----
From: Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:02:30 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] provide a dummy implementation of the clk API
With this implementation clk_get and clk_enable always succeed. The counterparts clk_put and clk_disable only do some minor error checking.
--- lib/Kconfig | 6 ++++++ lib/Makefile | 2 ++ lib/dummyclk.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 lib/dummyclk.c
lib/Kconfig +6 -0
@@ -141,4 +141,10 @@ config HAS_DMA config CHECK_SIGNATURE bool +config DUMMY_CLK + def_bool y if X86 + help + This provides a dummy implementation for the API defined in + linux/clk.h for platforms that don't implement it theirselves. + endmenu
lib/Makefile +2 -0
@@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION) += fault-inject.o lib-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_BUG) += bug.o +obj-$(CONFIG_DUMMY_CLK) += dummyclk.o + hostprogs-y := gen_crc32table clean-files := crc32table.h
lib/dummyclk.c new file +54 -0
54 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 7 lines
1.5.4.5 -- Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 35 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).Quoted 5 lines
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Only that the kernels
Kconfigis turning into a real complicated mess of dependencies IMHO.Quoted 6 lines
We could add a
HAVE_CLKand add that to the dependency of all the drivers which uselinux/clk.h. The problem will be finding all those drivers and their correspondingKconfigentries.My feeling is that we're just going to end up creating another
Kconfigsymbol which folk half-heartedly use.
Quoted 6 lines
I don't like that either. What do you think about the patch below? It doesn't introduce a new symbol that needs much care and attention. This way the clk API is available on all configurations provided that
CONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set correctly. IfCONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set wrong it should result in a compile error. Either because there are two implementations ofclk_getor none.
Hang on. I'm lost. What are we talking about here? I thought the thread was about the one liner patch for UIO to arch/arm/Kconfi (which still hasn't hit the patch system so is still on target for being missed...)
What's this drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko module, and why doesn't it appear in the LKML archive of this thread?
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hi Russell,
Quoted 41 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 33 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).Quoted 5 lines
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Only that the kernels
Kconfigis turning into a real complicated mess of dependencies IMHO.Quoted 6 lines
We could add a
HAVE_CLKand add that to the dependency of all the drivers which uselinux/clk.h. The problem will be finding all those drivers and their correspondingKconfigentries.My feeling is that we're just going to end up creating another
Kconfigsymbol which folk half-heartedly use.Quoted 6 lines
I don't like that either. What do you think about the patch below? It doesn't introduce a new symbol that needs much care and attention. This way the clk API is available on all configurations provided that
CONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set correctly. IfCONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set wrong it should result in a compile error. Either because there are two implementations ofclk_getor none.
Quoted 4 lines
Hang on. I'm lost. What are we talking about here? I thought the thread was about the one liner patch for UIO to
arch/arm/Kconfi(which still hasn't hit the patch system so is still on target for being missed...)
No, the topic here is a generic uio platform driver. It uses the clk API and Hans criticised that is doesn't compile on x86 (because there is no implementation of the clk API). So I suggested to implement a dummy for that.
This is completly independant of the inclusion of drivers/uio/Kconfig in arch/arm/Kconfig. I will send a patch for that.
Quoted 2 lines
What's this
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.komodule, and why doesn't it appear in the LKML archive of this thread?
Don't know why lkml.org didn't link these. The start of the thread can be found at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/10/110
gmane managed to link these mails:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/663884
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello,
Quoted 2 lines
This is completly independant of the inclusion of
drivers/uio/Kconfiginarch/arm/Kconfig. I will send a patch for that.
BTW: I just found
So obviously gkh looks for that issue. In my eyes it should better go via rmk, but it doesn't really matter for me. Should I still send a patch to the patch system?
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 56 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hi Russell,
Quoted 41 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 33 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
But what about this:
ERROR: "
clk_get" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_enable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_disable" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "clk_put" [drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.ko] undefined!Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you have any extra patches applied?
Yes I have, but nothing special. This is part of a generic API defined in
include/linux/clk.h. One of it's use it to abstract away some platform dependencies. There are several architectures that define it[1].Quoted 4 lines
I know. Unfortunately, I tested on
x86_64, and it doesn't compile. If it's depending on something, then this dependency should be added inKconfig. If it can be selected in the configuration, I expect it to compile (and work).Quoted 5 lines
Maybe adding a dummy implementation that is compiled for machines that don't provide a native one. Currently there is no cpp symbol that tells if an machine supports the API.
@Russell: Do you have an opinion regarding this!?
Only that the kernels
Kconfigis turning into a real complicated mess of dependencies IMHO.Quoted 6 lines
We could add a
HAVE_CLKand add that to the dependency of all the drivers which uselinux/clk.h. The problem will be finding all those drivers and their correspondingKconfigentries.My feeling is that we're just going to end up creating another
Kconfigsymbol which folk half-heartedly use.Quoted 6 lines
I don't like that either. What do you think about the patch below? It doesn't introduce a new symbol that needs much care and attention. This way the clk API is available on all configurations provided that
CONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set correctly. IfCONFIG_DUMMY_CLKis set wrong it should result in a compile error. Either because there are two implementations ofclk_getor none.Quoted 4 lines
Hang on. I'm lost. What are we talking about here? I thought the thread was about the one liner patch for UIO to
arch/arm/Kconfi(which still hasn't hit the patch system so is still on target for being missed...)No, the topic here is a generic uio platform driver. It uses the clk API and Hans criticised that is doesn't compile on x86 (because there is no implementation of the clk API). So I suggested to implement a dummy for that.
This is completly independant of the inclusion of
drivers/uio/Kconfiginarch/arm/Kconfig. I will send a patch for that.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
What's this
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.komodule, and why doesn't it appear in the LKML archive of this thread?Don't know why lkml.org didn't link these. The start of the thread can be found at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/10/110
Thanks. Well, tbh, I don't know which way to go on this. Each of the suggested ways have their downsides.
However:
+ pdata->clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, DRIVER_NAME);
seems wrong - "uio" as a clock name?
+ /* XXX: better use dev_dbg, but which device should I use?
+ * info->uio_dev->dev isn't accessible here as struct uio_device+ * is opaque.
+ */
why not store a copy of 'dev' in struct uio_platdata ?
+ uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0];
+ for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) {
...
+ ++uiomem;
+ }
Who's to say there's pdev->num_resources entries in the 'mem' array? Shouldn't this loop also be limited to MAX_UIO_MAPS iterations (or maybe complain if there's more than MAX_UIO_MAPS)?
+/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not
+ * find it ...
+ */
+#ifndef STRINGIFY
+#define STRINGIFY(x) __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x)
+#define __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x) #x
+#endif
#include <linux/stringify.h> ?
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Russell,
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
What's this
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.komodule, and why doesn't it appear in the LKML archive of this thread?Don't know why lkml.org didn't link these. The start of the thread can be found at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/10/110
Quoted 8 lines
Thanks. Well, tbh, I don't know which way to go on this. Each of the suggested ways have their downsides.
However:
+
pdata->clk=clk_get(&pdev->dev, DRIVER_NAME);seems wrong - "uio" as a clock name?
What do you suggest? "uioclk"?
Quoted 6 lines
(quoted diff) +4
-0+ /* XXX: better use dev_dbg, but which device should I use? + * info->uio_dev->dev isn't accessible here as struct uio_device + * is opaque. + */why not store a copy of 'dev' in struct
uio_platdata?
I don't like increasing the size of struct uio_platdata only for a debug helper. In most cases pr_debug (or dev_dbg) compiles to nothing. Maybe the easiest way is to remove that debug statement.
Quoted 7 lines
(quoted diff) +4
-0+ uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0]; + for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { + ++uiomem; + }Who's to say there's
pdev->num_resourcesentries in the 'mem' array?
The code you skipped with ... from that loop includes
if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS]) {
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "...");
break;
}that should take care of that. In v2 of this patch the remaining entries are disabled by .size = 0.
Quoted 11 lines
Shouldn't this loop also be limited to
MAX_UIO_MAPSiterations (or maybe complain if there's more thanMAX_UIO_MAPS)?(quoted diff) +7
-0+/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not + * find it ... + */ +#ifndef STRINGIFY +#define STRINGIFY(x) __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x) +#define __STRINGIFY_HELPER(x) #x +#endif
Quoted 1 line
#include <
linux/stringify.h> ?
If you look at the v2 patch[1] I found that in the mean time. Thanks all the same.
Best regards and thanks for your review,
Uwe
[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/11/81 or
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/665257
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/11/81 or
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/665257
In one of the mails, it was said:
No. It's more important to see which variables are declared in the function and which are declared elsewhere. If you have to search the whole body of a function for possible declarations, this is BAD. And if it's not clear where a variable is used, the function is too long or has other style problems. Your function is short and clean, so where's the problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.
I disagree with this statement. It's far better to limit the scope of variables so that you know they only have local use, and eg, not used inside a loop and then outside with possible unintended effects.
If a variable is only used inside a loop, it should be declared _inside_ that loop.
The statement goes on to talk about the function being short and clean - that's not an argument to apply any particular point of view on this subject, since you can argue that because it's short and clean you can see that the variable is only used within the loop.
So, please, keep the variable declaration inside the loop, and don't pollute the outer levels with unnecessary variable declarations.
Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 19 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/11/81 or
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/665257In one of the mails, it was said:
No. It's more important to see which variables are declared in the function and which are declared elsewhere. If you have to search the whole body of a function for possible declarations, this is BAD. And if it's not clear where a variable is used, the function is too long or has other style problems. Your function is short and clean, so where's the problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.I disagree with this statement. It's far better to limit the scope of variables so that you know they only have local use, and eg, not used inside a loop and then outside with possible unintended effects.
If a variable is only used inside a loop, it should be declared _inside_ that loop.
Quoted 7 lines
The statement goes on to talk about the function being short and clean - that's not an argument to apply any particular point of view on this subject, since you can argue that because it's short and clean you can see that the variable is only used within the loop.
So, please, keep the variable declaration inside the loop, and don't pollute the outer levels with unnecessary variable declarations.
OK, I'm finally convinced :-)
I knew this style from C++ where it makes sense, because a (class-) variable declaration can implicitly call the constructor of that class which you normally want to avoid if not needed. As this doesn't happen in C, I found it unnecessary.
I agree now that there's also a readability argument. The limitation of the scope is probably not that important as compilers will optimize that anyway in a lot of cases.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigHello,
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+dev_warn (&pdev->dev,"device has more than " + stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS)
This must read __stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS). Sorry, I didn't compile test that.
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+dev_warn (&pdev->dev,"device has more than " + stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS)This must read
__stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS). Sorry, I didn't compile test that.
Care to send the latest version of this, I'm a bit lost as to what people want me to apply...
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 11 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+dev_warn (&pdev->dev,"device has more than " + stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS)This must read
__stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS). Sorry, I didn't compile test that.Care to send the latest version of this, I'm a bit lost as to what people want me to apply...
Hi Greg,
PATCH 4/4 still has a problem. It uses some clock framework functions not available on every architecture. E.g. on x86_64 you can select this driver in menuconfig, but it won't compile.
The first three patches are OK in my opinion. Uwe provided a second version of PATCH 1/4, PATCH 2/4 and PATCH 3/4 were alright in their original version. I added my Signed-off-by to 1-3, but not to 4.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 13 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 11 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+dev_warn (&pdev->dev,"device has more than " + stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS)This must read
__stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS). Sorry, I didn't compile test that.Care to send the latest version of this, I'm a bit lost as to what people want me to apply...
Quoted 8 lines
Hi Greg,
PATCH 4/4 still has a problem. It uses some clock framework functions not available on every architecture. E.g. onx86_64you can select this driver in menuconfig, but it won't compile.The first three patches are OK in my opinion. Uwe provided a second version of PATCH 1/4, PATCH 2/4 and PATCH 3/4 were alright in their original version. I added my Signed-off-by to 1-3, but not to 4.
Ok, I grabbed patch 1, 2 and 3 are already in my tree and -mm :)
Let me know if you all come to an agreement on patch 4.
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 7 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello Hans,
Quoted 4 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 3 lines
+/* XXX: I thought there already exists something like STRINGIFY, but I could not
+ * find it ...
+ */
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Why do you want that macro? You only use it once. The macro definition and the comment above are more than you can ever expect to save with it.
See below.
BTW, I found it, it's inlinux/stringify.h. And there are several possible users:
All right, I won't argue about this one. If you like it, use it.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 35
Quoted 7 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +6
-0+static int uio_pdrv_open (struct uio_info *info,struct inode *inode) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata = info->priv; +int ret; + +BUG_ON (pdata->uioinfo != info);How can this BUG ever be triggered?
Quoted 3 lines
I hope it cannot, that's why it is a bug if it happens. :-) And one should expect that no
BUG_ONshould ever be triggered. I usually useBUG_ONfor "declaring" preconditions.
OK, as this is a generic driver where we don't know what crap people will pass in, it might be justified. OK.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];Please don't define new variables in the middle of a function.
This is a matter of taste. In my eyes it's better to declare it here because then it's easier to see where it's used.
No. It's more important to see which variables are declared in the function and which are declared elsewhere. If you have to search the whole body of a function for possible declarations, this is BAD. And if it's not clear where a variable is used, the function is too long or has other style problems. Your function is short and clean, so where's the problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.
Quoted 21 lines
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 96
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +5
-0+ +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) {I'd prefer this:
if (i >= MAX_UIO_MAPS) { ...OK.
BTW would you be open to redefine
uio_infoas:struct uio_info { struct uio_device *uio_dev; ... size_t num_memmaps; struct uio_mem mem[]; }
Quoted 7 lines
This allows to allocate exactly the number of members in the mem array that are needed (for the cost of a
size_t). (You just do:uio_info uioinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(*uioinfo) + num_memmaps * sizeof(uioinfo->mem[0]), GFP_KERNEL);it's still one chunk of memory and usage is similar---just with
MAX_UIO_MAPSsubstituted byuioinfo->num_memmaps.)
I don't like it. It makes things more complicated without any obvious gain. sizeof(struct uio_info) would return wrong values, you need to free the extra memory, userspace applications need to be able to deal with 10000 mappings...
If there's an actual usecase where 5 mappings are not enough, we can talk about increasing MAX_UIO_MAPS to some other value.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 99
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +3
-0+ dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + STRINGIFY(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" );What about this:
dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than %d" " I/O memory resources.\n", MAX_UIO_MAPS);would save the macro.
Quoted 8 lines
The macro is for free, using "%d" is not:
ukleinek@zentaur:~/kbuild-ns921x$ size drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_with* text data bss dec hex filename 808 72 0 880 370 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_withoutstringify.o 800 72 0 872 368 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_withstringify.oYou might consider that a bit over-engineered :-)
As I said above, feel free to use it.
Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 15 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 123
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +11
-0+ ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo); + +if (ret) { +clk_put (pdata->clk); +err_clk_get: + +kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + }How I hate labels within blocks... OK, I admit, it looks good here... Well...
Quoted 4 lines
That's a matter of taste, too, I like it that way. Probably it doesn't matter for the compiler (I havn't tried), but this way it's one goto less. And if it doesn't matter for the compiler it's at least nice for the reader. Though obviously YMMV.
As I said, it looks OK here. You can keep it if you like it.
I'd like to thank you for your work. After giving it some thought, I really like the idea of having a generic UIO driver for platform devices. I think many people (including /me) will use it. So, please send an updated patch, I think we should push it to mainline.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Hans,
Quoted 8 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 6 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c line 91
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +2
-0+for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];Please don't define new variables in the middle of a function.
This is a matter of taste. In my eyes it's better to declare it here because then it's easier to see where it's used.
Quoted 6 lines
No. It's more important to see which variables are declared in the function and which are declared elsewhere. If you have to search the whole body of a function for possible declarations, this is BAD. And if it's not clear where a variable is used, the function is too long or has other style problems. Your function is short and clean, so where's the problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.
I'm not conviced and still prefer it that way. I gave way for your requests in uio.c because it's your code. I want to leave it as it is and hope you will accept that (as this is my code).
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 12 lines
BTW would you be open to redefine
uio_infoas:struct uio_info { struct uio_device *uio_dev; ... size_t num_memmaps; struct uio_mem mem[]; }This allows to allocate exactly the number of members in the mem array that are needed (for the cost of a
size_t). (You just do:
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
uio_info uioinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(*uioinfo) + num_memmaps * sizeof(uioinfo->mem[0]), GFP_KERNEL);it's still one chunk of memory and usage is similar---just with
MAX_UIO_MAPSsubstituted byuioinfo->num_memmaps.)I don't like it. It makes things more complicated without any obvious gain.
Most use cases I imagine only use a single mapping, so the gain would be to save 4 (or later more) 'struct uio_mem's per device.
Quoted 1 line
sizeof(struct uio_info)would return wrong values,
For which definition of wrong? sizeof(struct uio_info) don't include space for mem then, but in my eyes that's correct. Having to care about the size of mem is the burden when it's not constant.
Quoted 2 lines
you need to
free the extra memory,
There is no extra memory because uioinfo and it's mem member are allocated together with a single kzalloc (and must be). (Thats the difference to
struct uio_info {
...
size_t num_memmaps;
struct uio_mem *mem;
};.)
Quoted 2 lines
userspace applications need to be able to deal
with 10000 mappings...
For the userspace it's exactly the same, isn't it?
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 5 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 1 line
problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.
I'm not conviced and still prefer it that way. I gave way for your requests in
uio.cbecause it's your code. I want to leave it as it is and hope you will accept that (as this is my code).
I looked around a bit and talked to some people. It seems that a local variable declaration within a for{} block is OK. I still don't like it, but I won't object any longer.
So, AFAICT you've only got that arch dependency problem left to solve.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 3/4] UIO: wrap all uio drivers in "if UIO" and "endif"
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
currently there is only one driver, but new entries don't need to depend explicitly on UIO.
Agreed.
Quoted 31 lines
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)drivers/uio/Kconfig +5
-1@@ -11,9 +11,11 @@ menuconfig UIO If you don't know what to do here, say N. +if UIO + config UIO_CIF tristate "generic Hilscher CIF Card driver" - depends on UIO && PCI + depends on PCI default n help Driver for Hilscher CIF DeviceNet and Profibus cards. This@@ -23,3 +25,5 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. + +endifSignature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 3/4] UIO: wrap all uio drivers in "if UIO" and "endif"
Quoted 7 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K??nig
currently there is only one driver, but new entries don't need to depend explicitly on UIO.
Agreed.
Signed-off-by Hans J Koch <[email protected]>
Already in the -mm tree...
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 2/4] UIO: use menuconfig
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-König
This allows configuring
CONFIG_UIOwithout changing into the UIO submenu
I like it.
Quoted 30 lines
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 8 ++------ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)drivers/uio/Kconfig +2
-6@@ -1,9 +1,7 @@ -menu "Userspace I/O" - depends on !S390 - -config UIO +menuconfig UIO tristate "Userspace I/O drivers" default n + depends on !S390 help Enable this to allow the userspace driver core code to be built. This code allows userspace programs easy access to@@ -25,5 +23,3 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. - -endmenuSignature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 2/4] UIO: use menuconfig
Quoted 6 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-K??nig
This allows configuring
CONFIG_UIOwithout changing into the UIO submenuI like it.
Signed-off-by Hans J Koch <[email protected]>
You like it so much you already acked this same change from someone else, which is in my tree at:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-01-driver-core/uio-kconfig-improvements.patch
:)
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 2/4] UIO: use menuconfig
Quoted 6 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 5 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-K??nig
This allows configuring
CONFIG_UIOwithout changing into the UIO submenuI like it.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by Hans J Koch <[email protected]>You like it so much you already acked this same change from someone else, which is in my tree at:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-01-driver-core/uio-kconfig-improvements.patch:)
Hey, I just wanted to improve my Signed-off-by statistics :-) Damn it, one less...
No, seriously, it looked somehow familiar but I didn't remember. Sorry.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.
To help your understanding, without this patch I can trigger the Oops by starting an app that does
opening and mmapping /dev/uio0 while(1);
and then in another shell do
rmmod uio_pdrv
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.
Hi Uwe,
thanks for this one, good catch! Looks fine to me. There are some minor issues, see below.
And I'd like to hear Greg's opinion: Do you agree we can omit try_module_get() in uio_mmap()?
Thanks,
Hans
Quoted 43 lines
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>--- drivers/uio/uio.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)drivers/uio/uio.c +12
-8@@ -301,25 +301,35 @@ static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)if (!idev)return -ENODEV ; +if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) { + ret = -ENODEV ; + goto err_module_get; + } + listener =kmalloc (sizeof (*listener),GFP_KERNEL ); -if (!listener) -return -ENOMEM ; +if (!listener) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; + goto err_alloc_listener; + } listener->dev = idev; listener->event_count =atomic_read (&idev->event); filep->private_data = listener;if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } +if (ret) { +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: -if (ret) -kfree (listener);
drivers/uio/uio.c static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep) · line 333
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +7
-1+module_put (idev->owner); +err_module_get: -return ret; +return ret; + } + } + +return 0 ; }
I really don't like these labels inside the if-block. I find it hard to read. What about this:
if (idev->info->open) {
ret = idev->info->open(idev->info, inode);
if (ret)
kfree(listener);
return ret;
}err_alloc_listener:
module_put(idev->owner); err_module_get: return ret;
The label err_module_get should probably be omitted because it's used only once and has just one line of code. You could simply write "return ret" instead of "goto err_module_get".
}
Quoted 32 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +4
-8static int uio_fasync (int fd,struct file *filep,int on)@@ -336,12 +346,11 @@ static int uio_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)struct uio_listener *listener = filep->private_data;struct uio_device *idev = listener->dev; -if (idev->info->release) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; +if (idev->info->release) ret = idev->info->release (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } + +module_put (idev->owner); +if (filep->f_flags &FASYNC ) ret =uio_fasync (-1 , filep,0 );kfree (listener);@@ -510,10 +519,7 @@ static int uio_mmap(struct file *filep, struct vm_area_struct *vma)return -EINVAL ;if (idev->info->mmap) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->mmap (idev->info, vma); -module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }Signature · 1 line
1.5.4.5
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Quoted 9 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K??nig
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.Hi Uwe,
thanks for this one, good catch! Looks fine to me. There are some minor issues, see below.
And I'd like to hear Greg's opinion: Do you agree we can omittry_module_get()inuio_mmap()?
If it's already been grabbed in the open() call, everything should be safe, right?
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Quoted 5 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 4 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-K??nig
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Hi Uwe,
thanks for this one, good catch! Looks fine to me. There are some minor issues, see below.
And I'd like to hear Greg's opinion: Do you agree we can omittry_module_get()inuio_mmap()?If it's already been grabbed in the
open()call, everything should be safe, right?
Yes, it looks quite clean to me. module_get in open(), module_put in release() and nothing of that sort anywhere else. Maybe it just looked toooo simple to me ;-)
Thanks for your confirmation.
Hans
Quoted 4 lines
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
In reply to Hans J. KochHello,
Quoted 6 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 2 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.And I'd like to hear Greg's opinion: Do you agree we can omit
try_module_get()inuio_mmap()?
As Greg already pointed out, mmap only works for open files and so the reference is already hold there.
Quoted 34 lines
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +3
-6if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } +if (ret) { +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: -if (ret) -kfree (listener);drivers/uio/uio.c static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep) · line 333
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +7
-1+module_put (idev->owner); +err_module_get: -return ret; +return ret; + } + } + +return 0 ; }I really don't like these labels inside the if-block. I find it hard to read. What about this:
if (idev->info->open) { ret = idev->info->open(idev->info, inode); if (ret) kfree(listener); return ret; }
Quoted 4 lines
err_alloc_listener:module_put(idev->owner); err_module_get: return ret;
With that you leak a reference to idev->owner if idev->info->open() fails. Things like that don't happen that easy if all error handing is in one place.
Quoted 3 lines
The label
err_module_getshould probably be omitted because it's used only once and has just one line of code. You could simply write "return ret" instead of "gotoerr_module_get".
This makes code shuffling easier. For example if someone decides that try_module_get should be done after allocating listener then you only have to exchange the two corresponding code blocks and the two groups (label + cleanup) in the error handling block.
If the error handling is spread over the whole functions you can easily miss something---as happend above. :-)
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 1/4] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Quoted 4 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Quoted 2 lines
And I'd like to hear Greg's opinion: Do you agree we can omit
try_module_get()inuio_mmap()?As Greg already pointed out, mmap only works for open files and so the reference is already hold there.
Yes, that's OK.
Quoted 35 lines
Quoted 35 lines
Quoted 13 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +3
-6if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } +if (ret) { +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: -if (ret) -kfree (listener);drivers/uio/uio.c static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep) · line 333
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/uio/uio.c +7
-1+module_put (idev->owner); +err_module_get: -return ret; +return ret; + } + } + +return 0 ; }I really don't like these labels inside the if-block. I find it hard to read. What about this:
if (idev->info->open) { ret = idev->info->open(idev->info, inode); if (ret) kfree(listener); return ret; }
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
err_alloc_listener:module_put(idev->owner); err_module_get: return ret;With that you leak a reference to
idev->ownerifidev->info->open()fails. Things like that don't happen that easy if all error handing is in one place.
Maybe. It's merely an example to explain what I mean. Documentation/CodingStyle says nothing about how to place labels, but I find it best to have all error path exits at the end of a function. All the UIO code does it that way.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 4 lines
The label
err_module_getshould probably be omitted because it's used only once and has just one line of code. You could simply write "return ret" instead of "gotoerr_module_get".This makes code shuffling easier. For example if someone decides that
try_module_getshould be done after allocating listener then you only have to exchange the two corresponding code blocks and the two groups (label + cleanup) in the error handling block.
If the error handling is spread over the whole functions you can easily miss something---as happend above. :-)
Well, it depends. It's all about readability. Any function should be written in a way that makes it as clear as possible what it does. Your code is certainly not critical regarding that aspect, but I think it can still be improved. And a label that is used only once and contains only one line of code is definetly unnecessary. I don't follow the maybe-one-day-in-the-future-it-might-be-useful philosophy. I like code that is as clean and readable as possible _now_. And as this patch is not just a driver but affects the UIO core, this is even more important.
Could you please send an updated patch?
Thanks,
Hans
PATCH v2 1/4 UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Otherwise the device might just disappear while /dev/uioX is being used which results in an Oops.
---
Quoted 10 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
The label
err_module_getshould probably be omitted because it's used only once and has just one line of code. You could simply write "return ret" instead of "gotoerr_module_get".This makes code shuffling easier. For example if someone decides that
try_module_getshould be done after allocating listener then you only have to exchange the two corresponding code blocks and the two groups (label + cleanup) in the error handling block.
If the error handling is spread over the whole functions you can easily miss something---as happend above. :-)
Quoted 7 lines
Well, it depends. It's all about readability. Any function should be written in a way that makes it as clear as possible what it does. Your code is certainly not critical regarding that aspect, but I think it can still be improved. And a label that is used only once and contains only one line of code is definetly unnecessary. I don't follow the maybe-one-day-in-the-future-it-might-be-useful philosophy. I like code that is as clean and readable as possible _now_.
That thing about code reordering is minor compared to having all error handling in one place, but ...
Quoted 4 lines
And as this patch is
not just a driver but affects the UIO core, this is even more important.Could you please send an updated patch?
... , it's your code, so you can find a new version below.
Best regards
Uwe
drivers/uio/uio.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/uio.c +21 -15
@@ -301,23 +301,33 @@ static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)if (!idev)return -ENODEV ; +if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) +return -ENODEV ; + listener =kmalloc (sizeof (*listener),GFP_KERNEL ); -if (!listener) -return -ENOMEM ; +if (!listener) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; + goto err_alloc_listener; + } listener->dev = idev; listener->event_count =atomic_read (&idev->event); filep->private_data = listener;if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); +if (ret) + goto err_infoopen; } -if (ret) -kfree (listener); +return 0 ; + +err_infoopen: + +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: + +module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }
@@ -336,12 +346,11 @@ static int uio_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)struct uio_listener *listener = filep->private_data;struct uio_device *idev = listener->dev; -if (idev->info->release) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; +if (idev->info->release) ret = idev->info->release (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } + +module_put (idev->owner); +if (filep->f_flags &FASYNC ) ret =uio_fasync (-1 , filep,0 );kfree (listener);
@@ -510,10 +519,7 @@ static int uio_mmap(struct file *filep, struct vm_area_struct *vma)return -EINVAL ;if (idev->info->mmap) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->mmap (idev->info, vma); -module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }
Signature · 7 lines
1.5.4.5 -- Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 1/4 v2] UIO: hold a reference to the device's owner while the device is open
Quoted 4 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Otherwise the device might just disappear while
/dev/uioXis being used which results in an Oops.Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>
Looks alright, thanks!
Quoted 20 lines
---
Quoted 10 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
The label
err_module_getshould probably be omitted because it's used only once and has just one line of code. You could simply write "return ret" instead of "gotoerr_module_get".This makes code shuffling easier. For example if someone decides that
try_module_getshould be done after allocating listener then you only have to exchange the two corresponding code blocks and the two groups (label + cleanup) in the error handling block.
If the error handling is spread over the whole functions you can easily miss something---as happend above. :-)Quoted 7 lines
Well, it depends. It's all about readability. Any function should be written in a way that makes it as clear as possible what it does. Your code is certainly not critical regarding that aspect, but I think it can still be improved. And a label that is used only once and contains only one line of code is definetly unnecessary. I don't follow the maybe-one-day-in-the-future-it-might-be-useful philosophy. I like code that is as clean and readable as possible _now_.
Quoted 8 lines
That thing about code reordering is minor compared to having all error handling in one place, but ...
Quoted 4 lines
And as this patch is
not just a driver but affects the UIO core, this is even more important.Could you please send an updated patch?
... , it's your code, so you can find a new version below.
It's not _my_ code, it's _our_ code, partly written by me. At home, I use any coding style I like. But this is in mainline, so we use the coding style the kernel community has agreed upon.
Quoted 88 lines
Best regards
Uwedrivers/uio/uio.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)drivers/uio/uio.c +21
-15@@ -301,23 +301,33 @@ static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)if (!idev)return -ENODEV ; +if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) +return -ENODEV ; + listener =kmalloc (sizeof (*listener),GFP_KERNEL ); -if (!listener) -return -ENOMEM ; +if (!listener) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; + goto err_alloc_listener; + } listener->dev = idev; listener->event_count =atomic_read (&idev->event); filep->private_data = listener;if (idev->info->open) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->open (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); +if (ret) + goto err_infoopen; } -if (ret) -kfree (listener); +return 0 ; + +err_infoopen: + +kfree (listener); +err_alloc_listener: + +module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }@@ -336,12 +346,11 @@ static int uio_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)struct uio_listener *listener = filep->private_data;struct uio_device *idev = listener->dev; -if (idev->info->release) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; +if (idev->info->release) ret = idev->info->release (idev->info, inode); -module_put (idev->owner); - } + +module_put (idev->owner); +if (filep->f_flags &FASYNC ) ret =uio_fasync (-1 , filep,0 );kfree (listener);@@ -510,10 +519,7 @@ static int uio_mmap(struct file *filep, struct vm_area_struct *vma)return -EINVAL ;if (idev->info->mmap) { -if (!try_module_get (idev->owner)) -return -ENODEV ; ret = idev->info->mmap (idev->info, vma); -module_put (idev->owner);return ret; }Signature · 7 lines
1.5.4.5 -- Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
cover UIO: cleanup and platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigHello,
there are three patches left in my uio queue that didn't made it into mainline up to now.
You can find the patches in my uio branch at
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.git uio
and I will resend the patches as a reply to this mail.
Shortlog and diffstat can be found below.
Best regards
Uwe
Uwe Kleine-König (3):
UIO: don't let UIO_CIF and UIO_SMX depend twice on UIO provide a dummy implementation of the clk API
UIO: generic platform driver
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 10 +++- drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 155 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ lib/Kconfig | 6 ++ lib/Makefile | 2 + lib/dummyclk.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++ 6 files changed, 226 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
PATCH 1/3 UIO: don't let UIO_CIF and UIO_SMX depend twice on UIO
ae210f188614bb3d1ee3f19c64e28e3cdd44877c introduced a big "if UIO"/"endif" where all uio drivers are defined. So know there is no need for them to depend explicitly on UIO.
---
Hello,
these hunks were part of a patch in my first series but that patch was dropped because another patch in Greg's queue did a subset of mine.
Best regards
Uwe
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 3 +-- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/Kconfig +1 -2
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ if UIO config UIO_CIF tristate "generic Hilscher CIF Card driver" - depends on UIO && PCI + depends on PCI default n help Driver for Hilscher CIF DeviceNet and Profibus cards. This
@@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ config UIO_CIF config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" - depends on UIO default n help Userspace IO interface to the Cryptography engine found on the
Signature · 1 line
1.5.5
PATCH 2/3 provide a dummy implementation of the clk API
With this implementation clk_get and clk_enable always succeed. The counterparts clk_put and clk_disable only do some minor error checking.
--- lib/Kconfig | 6 ++++++ lib/Makefile | 2 ++ lib/dummyclk.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 lib/dummyclk.c
Hello,
this patch isn't really UIO related, but as my platform driver uses the clk API and that's not implemented on X86 here comes a dummy implementation.
This patch was already sent but up to now I got no feedback for it.
Best regards
Uwe
lib/Kconfig +6 -0
@@ -144,4 +144,10 @@ config CHECK_SIGNATURE config HAVE_LMB boolean +config DUMMY_CLK + def_bool y if X86 + help + This provides a dummy implementation for the API defined in + linux/clk.h for platforms that don't implement it theirselves. + endmenu
lib/Makefile +2 -0
@@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ lib-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_BUG) += bug.o obj-$(CONFIG_HAVE_LMB) += lmb.o +obj-$(CONFIG_DUMMY_CLK) += dummyclk.o + hostprogs-y := gen_crc32table clean-files := crc32table.h
lib/dummyclk.c new file +54 -0
54 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.5.5
PATCH 3/3 UIO: generic platform driver
---
Hello,
This is the former patch 4/4 after some discussion.
Open issues:
- clock name "uio" isn't considered good by Russell King
I don't have a better suggestion
- some code could be shared with uio_smx.c
I would address that in a seperate patch after this one hits mainline.
I appreciate any feedback.
Best regards,
Uwe
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 ++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 154 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7 -0
@@ -26,6 +26,13 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" default n
drivers/uio/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_SMX) += uio_smx.o
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +154 -0
154 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.5.5
Re: [PATCH 3/3] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>---
Hello,This is the former patch 4/4 after some discussion.
Open issues:
- clock name "uio" isn't considered good by Russell King I don't have a better suggestion
I'd suggest it should be passed through from the platform code: only it knows what it's going to be (and if indeed there's going to be one at all). In fact, the lack-of-clock at the moment is fatal; it shouldn't be IMO. For example, I don't need one in SMX.
Quoted 2 lines
- some code could be shared with
uio_smx.c
I would address that in a seperate patch after this one hits mainline.
As I said before I'd prefer to keep my driver separate and standalone, but you and HJK have expressed a wish for unification. If I get this formally I'll consider myself outvoted and submit a patch to unify it all when I submit my platform code (soon).
--Ben.
Re: [PATCH 3/3] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 6 lines · Ben Nizette
Quoted 3 lines
- some code could be shared with
uio_smx.c
I would address that in a seperate patch after this one hits mainline.As I said before I'd prefer to keep my driver separate and standalone, but you and HJK have expressed a wish for unification.
This seems to be a misunderstanding. Actually, I don't care too much. If you like to keep your driver standalone, I don't have objections, even if Uwe's generic driver is merged. I think there are still valid reasons not to reduce a driver to a platform data struct.
Greg, what do you say to that?
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 3/3] UIO: generic platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigHello,
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>---
Hello,This is the former patch 4/4 after some discussion.
Open issues:
- clock name "uio" isn't considered good by Russell King I don't have a better suggestion
I added another branch[1] on my repo that doesn't have the dummy clk patch and variant of this one that doesn't use the clk API.
This way the clk API isn't needed anymore for my patch and the issue about the clock name disappeard, too.
Best regards
Uwe
[1] git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.git uio2
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH 3/3] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 6 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>---
Hello,This is the former patch 4/4 after some discussion.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Open issues:
- clock name "uio" isn't considered good by Russell King I don't have a better suggestionI added another branch[1] on my repo that doesn't have the dummy clk patch and variant of this one that doesn't use the clk API.
This way the clk API isn't needed anymore for my patch and the issue about the clock name disappeard, too.
Hi Uwe,
sorry for the delay, I was away for a few days and had an awful lot of work when I came back.
About your generic platform driver: I think we've got two choices, both of them are acceptable as far as I'm concerned:
1.) Use the clk API and make your driver depend on it. AFAICS, only ARM and PPC implement it right now. On some platforms, it will probably never be implemented. E.g. x86 doesn't have any clocks that could be controlled that way. It's probably only useful for SoCs.
Advantages: People who need it get clk support for free, without having to write much code.
Disadvantages: The generic platform driver is not available for all platforms. It might not be easy to implement the dependency in Kconfig in a way acceptable to all maintainers ;-)
2.) Don't use the clk API. I don't think we would lose much. Drivers could implement clk stuff in their board support. You could add some generic function pointers in struct uio_platdata that are called in open/release/probe/remove. That way, any platform specific stuff, including clk, could be handled.
Advantages: The generic platform driver is available for all platforms, no need for dependencies in Kconfig.
Disadvantages: People who need clk_* must write a lot of code within their board support file. Not nice and clean...
I'm ready to accept 1.) or 2.), or even both of them (why can't we have two generic platform drivers?)
As you are the author (and probably user) of this driver, please decide, and send a new patch for review.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH 3/3] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Hans,
Quoted 46 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello,
Quoted 6 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>---
Hello,This is the former patch 4/4 after some discussion.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Open issues:
- clock name "uio" isn't considered good by Russell King I don't have a better suggestionI added another branch[1] on my repo that doesn't have the dummy clk patch and variant of this one that doesn't use the clk API.
This way the clk API isn't needed anymore for my patch and the issue about the clock name disappeard, too.
Hi Uwe,
sorry for the delay, I was away for a few days and had an awful lot of work when I came back.About your generic platform driver: I think we've got two choices, both of them are acceptable as far as I'm concerned:
1.) Use the clk API and make your driver depend on it. AFAICS, only ARM and PPC implement it right now. On some platforms, it will probably never be implemented. E.g. x86 doesn't have any clocks that could be controlled that way. It's probably only useful for SoCs.
Advantages: People who need it get clk support for free, without having to write much code.
Disadvantages: The generic platform driver is not available for all platforms. It might not be easy to implement the dependency inKconfigin a way acceptable to all maintainers ;-)2.) Don't use the clk API. I don't think we would lose much. Drivers could implement clk stuff in their board support. You could add some generic function pointers in struct
uio_platdatathat are called in open/release/probe/remove. That way, any platform specific stuff, including clk, could be handled.
Advantages: The generic platform driver is available for all platforms, no need for dependencies inKconfig.
Disadvantages: People who need clk_* must write a lot of code within their board support file. Not nice and clean...
Quoted 2 lines
I'm ready to accept 1.) or 2.), or even both of them (why can't we have two generic platform drivers?)
For now I suggest 2). Using the clk API might be implemented by a generic open/release routine. Maybe I will look into that at a later time. For now I'm happy without clk support, too.
For now you can find two patches in my uio branch atgit://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.git uio
I rebased them to current Linus' master; otherwise they are unmodified since the last posts. For completeness I'll resend them as a reply to this mail.
For shortlog and diffstat see below.
Best regards
Uwe
Uwe Kleine-König (2):
UIO: don't let UIO_CIF and UIO_SMX depend twice on UIO
UIO: generic platform driver
drivers/uio/Kconfig | 10 +++- drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
PATCH 1/1 UIO: don't let UIO_CIF and UIO_SMX depend twice on UIO
ae210f188614bb3d1ee3f19c64e28e3cdd44877c introduced a big "if UIO"/"endif" where all uio drivers are defined. So know there is no need for them to depend explicitly on UIO.
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 3 +-- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/uio/Kconfig +1 -2
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ if UIO config UIO_CIF tristate "generic Hilscher CIF Card driver" - depends on UIO && PCI + depends on PCI default n help Driver for Hilscher CIF DeviceNet and Profibus cards. This
@@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ config UIO_CIF config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" - depends on UIO default n help Userspace IO interface to the Cryptography engine found on the
Signature · 1 line
1.5.5.1
PATCH 1/1 UIO: generic platform driver
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 +++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c
drivers/uio/Kconfig +7 -0
@@ -26,6 +26,13 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" default n
drivers/uio/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_SMX) += uio_smx.o
drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +118 -0
118 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.5.5.1
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>
Quoted 160 lines
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 7 +++ drivers/uio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.cdrivers/uio/Kconfig +7
-0@@ -26,6 +26,13 @@ config UIO_CIF To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called uio_cif. +config UIO_PDRV + tristate "Userspace I/O platform driver" + help + Generic platform driver for Userspace I/O devices. + + If you don't know what to do here, say N. + config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" default ndrivers/uio/Makefile +1
-0@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV) += uio_pdrv.o obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_SMX) += uio_smx.odrivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c new file +118
-0@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +/* +* drivers/uio/uio_pdrv.c +* +* Copyright (C) 2008 by Digi International Inc. +* All rights reserved. +* +* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it +* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published by +* the Free Software Foundation. +*/ +#include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/uio_driver.h> +#include <linux/stringify.h> + +#define DRIVER_NAME "uio" + +struct uio_platdata { +struct uio_info *uioinfo; +}; + +static int uio_pdrv_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_info *uioinfo = pdev->dev.platform_data; +struct uio_platdata *pdata; +struct uio_mem *uiomem; +int ret = -ENODEV ; +int i; + +if (!uioinfo || !uioinfo->name || !uioinfo->version) { +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_uioinfo\n" , __func__); + goto err_uioinfo; + } + + pdata =kzalloc (sizeof (*pdata),GFP_KERNEL ); +if (!pdata) { + ret = -ENOMEM ; +dev_dbg (&pdev->dev,"%s: err_alloc_pdata\n" , __func__); + goto err_alloc_pdata; + } + + pdata->uioinfo = uioinfo; + + uiomem = &uioinfo->mem[0 ]; + +for (i =0 ; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) { +struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i]; + +if (r->flags !=IORESOURCE_MEM ) +continue ; + +if (uiomem >= &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) { + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "device has more than " + __stringify(MAX_UIO_MAPS) +" I/O memory resources.\n" ); +break ; + } + + uiomem->memtype =UIO_MEM_PHYS ; + uiomem->addr = r->start; + uiomem->size = r->end - r->start +1 ; + ++uiomem; + } + +while (uiomem < &uioinfo->mem[MAX_UIO_MAPS ]) { + uiomem->size =0 ; + ++uiomem; + } + + pdata->uioinfo->priv = pdata; + + ret =uio_register_device (&pdev->dev, pdata->uioinfo); + +if (ret) { +kfree (pdata); +err_alloc_pdata: +err_uioinfo: +return ret; + } + +platform_set_drvdata (pdev, pdata); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int uio_pdrv_remove (struct platform_device *pdev) +{ +struct uio_platdata *pdata =platform_get_drvdata (pdev); + +uio_unregister_device (pdata->uioinfo); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct platform_driver uio_pdrv = { + .probe = uio_pdrv_probe, + .remove = uio_pdrv_remove, + .driver = { + .name =DRIVER_NAME , + .owner =THIS_MODULE , + }, +}; + +static int __init uio_pdrv_init (void ) +{ +return platform_driver_register (&uio_pdrv); +} + +static void __exit uio_pdrv_exit(void) +{ +platform_driver_unregister (&uio_pdrv); +} +module_init (uio_pdrv_init); +module_exit (uio_pdrv_exit); + +MODULE_AUTHOR ("Uwe Kleine-Koenig" ); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION ("Userspace I/O platform driver" ); +MODULE_LICENSE ("GPL" ); +MODULE_ALIAS ("platform:" DRIVER_NAME );Signature · 1 line
1.5.5.1
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello,
Quoted 4 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-König
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hans J. Koch <[email protected]>
I assume now these two patches are ready go into mainline?! What's the next step? Greg, do you take them into your driver tree?
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
Quoted 4 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-K?nig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hans J. Koch <[email protected]>I assume now these two patches are ready go into mainline?! What's the next step? Greg, do you take them into your driver tree?
Yes, if everyone has finally agreed, Hans, can you resend them to me so I know what to apply, with you signed-off-by?
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Greg,
Quoted 5 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 4 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
Quoted 1 line · Hans J. Koch
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:24:42AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-K?nig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hans J. Koch <[email protected]>I assume now these two patches are ready go into mainline?! What's the next step? Greg, do you take them into your driver tree?
Yes, if everyone has finally agreed, Hans, can you resend them to me so I know what to apply, with you signed-off-by?
If Hans did that, I didn't notice it. If you want to take the patches from me you can pull them from my uio branch at
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.git uio
These have the Signed-off-by: by Hans, too.
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 14 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
Hello Greg,
Quoted 11 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 9 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
Quoted 4 lines · Hans J. Koch
Quoted 1 line · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-K?nig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hans J. Koch <[email protected]>I assume now these two patches are ready go into mainline?! What's the next step? Greg, do you take them into your driver tree?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Yes, if everyone has finally agreed, Hans, can you resend them to me so I know what to apply, with you signed-off-by?
If Hans did that, I didn't notice it. If you want to take the patches from me you can pull them from my uio branch at
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.gituioThese have the Signed-off-by: by Hans, too.
Hans is at LinuxTag this week and said he would send them to me when he got back. So I'll wait for his copies, I'd prefer not to pull from git, as that doesn't really work well with my patchflow process.
thanks,
greg k-h
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Greg,
Quoted 11 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Yes, if everyone has finally agreed, Hans, can you resend them to me so I know what to apply, with you signed-off-by?
If Hans did that, I didn't notice it. If you want to take the patches from me you can pull them from my uio branch at
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.gituioThese have the Signed-off-by: by Hans, too.
Hans is at LinuxTag this week and said he would send them to me when he got back. So I'll wait for his copies,
OK.
Quoted 2 lines
I'd prefer not to pull from git,
as that doesn't really work well with my patchflow process.
I know you work with quilt, but I thought it to be no problem for you to extract the patches from my tree into your quilt queue. I'll remember that for the future. :-)
Best regards
Uwe
Signature · 3 lines
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
Re: [PATCH] UIO: generic platform driver
Quoted 8 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello Greg,
Quoted 5 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Yes, if everyone has finally agreed, Hans, can you resend them to me so I know what to apply, with you signed-off-by?
If Hans did that, I didn't notice it. If you want to take the patches from me you can pull them from my uio branch at
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.gituioThese have the Signed-off-by: by Hans, too.
Hans is at LinuxTag this week and said he would send them to me when he got back. So I'll wait for his copies,
OK.
I sent the latest version to Greg, should get merged soon.
Thanks,
Hans
Re: [PATCH] UIO: don't let UIO_CIF and UIO_SMX depend twice on UIO
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 3 lines · Uwe Kleine-König
ae210f188614bb3d1ee3f19c64e28e3cdd44877cintroduced a big "if UIO"/"endif" where all uio drivers are defined. So know there is no need for them to depend explicitly on UIO.
Ahem, of course. Thanks!
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>
Quoted 27 lines
--- drivers/uio/Kconfig | 3 +-- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)drivers/uio/Kconfig +1
-2@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ if UIO config UIO_CIF tristate "generic Hilscher CIF Card driver" - depends on UIO && PCI + depends on PCI default n help Driver for Hilscher CIF DeviceNet and Profibus cards. This@@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ config UIO_CIF config UIO_SMX tristate "SMX cryptengine UIO interface" - depends on UIO default n help Userspace IO interface to the Cryptography engine found on theSignature · 1 line
1.5.5.1
Re: [PATCH 0/3] UIO: cleanup and platform driver
In reply to Uwe Kleine-KönigQuoted 10 lines · Uwe Kleine-K?nig
Hello,
there are three patches left in my uio queue that didn't made it into mainline up to now.
You can find the patches in my uio branch at
git://www.modarm9.com/gitsrc/pub/people/ukleinek/linux-2.6.gituioand I will resend the patches as a reply to this mail.
Hi Uwe,
thanks for your work. Greg and I are at the Hannover trade fair ATM. I'll be back home on Thursday and will have a look at your patches then.
Thanks,
Hans