iio: Fix parameters in iio_triggered_buffer_setup
PATCH 1/1 iio: Fix parameters in iio_triggered_buffer_setup
This patch renames the top half handler and the bottom half handler of iio_triggered_buffer_setup() in accordance with their usage. The names of the parameters were swapped, thus creating confusion.
--- drivers/iio/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c | 8 ++++---- include/linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
drivers/iio/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c +4 -4
@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@ static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ops = {/** * iio_triggered_buffer_setup() - Setup triggered buffer and pollfunc * @indio_dev: IIO device structure -* @pollfunc_bh: Function which will be used as pollfunc bottom half * @pollfunc_th: Function which will be used as pollfunc top half +* @pollfunc_bh: Function which will be used as pollfunc bottom half * @setup_ops: Buffer setup functions to use for this device. * If NULL the default setup functions for triggered * buffers will be used.
@@ -42,8 +42,8 @@ static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ops = {* iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(). */ int iio_triggered_buffer_setup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev, -irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_th)(int irq,void *p), +irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops *setup_ops) {struct iio_buffer *buffer;
@@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ int iio_triggered_buffer_setup(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,iio_device_attach_buffer (indio_dev, buffer); - indio_dev->pollfunc = iio_alloc_pollfunc(pollfunc_bh, - pollfunc_th, + indio_dev->pollfunc = iio_alloc_pollfunc(pollfunc_th, + pollfunc_bh, IRQF_ONESHOT, indio_dev, "%s_consumer%d",
include/linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h +1 -1
@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ struct iio_dev;struct iio_buffer_setup_ops ;int iio_triggered_buffer_setup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev, -irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_th)(int irq,void *p), +irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops *setup_ops);void iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
Quoted 5 lines · Cristina Opriceana
This patch renames the top half handler and the bottom half handler of
iio_triggered_buffer_setup()in accordance with their usage. The names of the parameters were swapped, thus creating confusion.Signed-off-by Cristina Opriceana <[email protected]>
Thanks Cristina!
Daniel.
Jonathan Cameron
maintainerQuoted 5 lines · Cristina Opriceana
This patch renames the top half handler and the bottom half handler of
iio_triggered_buffer_setup()in accordance with their usage. The names of the parameters were swapped, thus creating confusion.Signed-off-by Cristina Opriceana <[email protected]>
Good point. This is definitely misleading. I wonder if the _th naming is a good idea anymore though given that the bottom half (in the traditional sense) is now a thread based call and hence the th might be confusing? Perhaps the h and thread naming used in the pollfunc code would be clearer?
Lars, this bit was yours originally. Any thoughts?
Quoted 55 lines
--- drivers/iio/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c | 8 ++++---- include/linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)drivers/iio/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c +4
-4@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@ static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ops = {/** * iio_triggered_buffer_setup() - Setup triggered buffer and pollfunc * @indio_dev: IIO device structure -* @pollfunc_bh: Function which will be used as pollfunc bottom half * @pollfunc_th: Function which will be used as pollfunc top half +* @pollfunc_bh: Function which will be used as pollfunc bottom half * @setup_ops: Buffer setup functions to use for this device. * If NULL the default setup functions for triggered * buffers will be used. @@ -42,8 +42,8 @@ static const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ops = {* iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup(). */ int iio_triggered_buffer_setup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev, -irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_th)(int irq,void *p), +irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops *setup_ops) {struct iio_buffer *buffer;@@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ int iio_triggered_buffer_setup(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,iio_device_attach_buffer (indio_dev, buffer); - indio_dev->pollfunc = iio_alloc_pollfunc(pollfunc_bh, - pollfunc_th, + indio_dev->pollfunc = iio_alloc_pollfunc(pollfunc_th, + pollfunc_bh, IRQF_ONESHOT, indio_dev, "%s_consumer%d",include/linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h +1
-1@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ struct iio_dev;struct iio_buffer_setup_ops ;int iio_triggered_buffer_setup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev, -irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_th)(int irq,void *p), +irqreturn_t (*pollfunc_bh)(int irq,void *p),const struct iio_buffer_setup_ops *setup_ops);void iio_triggered_buffer_cleanup (struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
Quoted 11 lines · Jonathan Cameron
Quoted 5 lines · Cristina Opriceana
This patch renames the top half handler and the bottom half handler of
iio_triggered_buffer_setup()in accordance with their usage. The names of the parameters were swapped, thus creating confusion.Signed-off-by Cristina Opriceana <[email protected]>Good point. This is definitely misleading. I wonder if the
_thnaming is a good idea anymore though given that the bottom half (in the traditional sense) is now a thread based call and hence the th might be confusing? Perhaps the h and thread naming used in the pollfunc code would be clearer?
Sounds like a good idea. Cristina can prepare a patch for this.
Quoted 1 line
Lars, this bit was yours originally. Any thoughts?
Lets wait for Lars thoughts on this.
Daniel.
Quoted 6 lines · Daniel Baluta
Quoted 5 lines · Jonathan Cameron
Quoted 4 lines · Cristina Opriceana
This patch renames the top half handler and the bottom half handler of
iio_triggered_buffer_setup()in accordance with their usage. The names of the parameters were swapped, thus creating confusion.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by Cristina Opriceana <[email protected]>Good point. This is definitely misleading. I wonder if the
_thnaming is a good idea anymore though given that the bottom half (in the traditional sense) is now a thread based call and hence the th might be confusing? Perhaps the h and thread naming used in the pollfunc code would be clearer?Sounds like a good idea. Cristina can prepare a patch for this.
Quoted 1 line
Lars, this bit was yours originally. Any thoughts?
Jonathan, that's your naming convention I merely added the wrapper function.
I'm OK with changing the naming.