On Sunday 08 January 2006 18:12, Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> + int err;
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = container_of(inode->i_cdev,
> + struct rtc_device, char_dev);
> + struct rtc_class_ops *ops = rtc->ops;
> +
> + /* We keep the lock as long as the device is in use
> + * and return immediately if busy
> + */
> + if (down_trylock(&rtc->char_sem))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
Does the device have to be opened for exclusively? Can it support
concurrent reads?
> + file->private_data = &rtc->class_dev;
> +
> + err = ops->open ? ops->open(rtc->class_dev.dev) : 0;
> + if (err == 0) {
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> + rtc->irq_data = 0;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /* something has gone wrong, release the lock */
> + up(&rtc->char_sem);
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +rtc_dev_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +
> + DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
> + unsigned long data;
> + ssize_t ret;
> +
> + if (count < sizeof(unsigned long))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + add_wait_queue(&rtc->irq_queue, &wait);
> + do {
> + __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> + data = rtc->irq_data;
> + rtc->irq_data = 0;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> + if (data != 0) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) {
> + ret = -EAGAIN;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (signal_pending(current)) {
> + ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
> + break;
> + }
> + schedule();
> + } while (1);
> + set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> + remove_wait_queue(&rtc->irq_queue, &wait);
> +
The above looks very much like open-coded wait_event_interruptible();
> + if (ret == 0) {
> + ret = put_user(data, (unsigned long __user *)buf);
> + if (ret == 0)
> + ret = sizeof(unsigned long);
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int rtc_dev_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> + unsigned long data;
> +
> + poll_wait(file, &rtc->irq_queue, wait);
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> + data = rtc->irq_data;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
> + return data != 0 ? POLLIN | POLLRDNORM : 0;
> +}
What does the lock above protect? Once it is released rtc->irq_data may
change so reader that was woken up may not see any data anyway.
> +static int rtc_dev_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> + unsigned long arg)
> +{
> + int err = 0;
> + struct class_device *class_dev = file->private_data;
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> + struct rtc_class_ops *ops = rtc->ops;
> + struct rtc_time tm;
> + struct rtc_wkalrm alarm;
> + void __user *uarg = (void __user *) arg;
> +
> + /* avoid conflicting IRQ users */
> + if (cmd == RTC_PIE_ON || cmd == RTC_PIE_OFF || cmd == RTC_IRQP_SET) {
> + spin_lock(&rtc->irq_task_lock);
> + if (rtc->irq_task)
> + err = -EBUSY;
> + spin_unlock(&rtc->irq_task_lock);
> +
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + /* try the driver's ioctl interface */
> + if (ops->ioctl) {
> + err = ops->ioctl(class_dev->dev, cmd, arg);
> + if (err < 0 && err != -EINVAL)
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + /* if the driver does not provide the ioctl interface
> + * or if that particular ioctl was not implemented
> + * (-EINVAL), we will try to emulate here.
> + */
> +
> + switch (cmd) {
> + case RTC_ALM_READ:
> + if ((err = rtc_read_alarm(class_dev, &alarm)) < 0)
> + return err;
> +
> + if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &alarm.time, sizeof(tm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + break;
> +
> + case RTC_ALM_SET:
> + if ((err = copy_from_user(&alarm.time, uarg, sizeof(tm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + alarm.enabled = 0;
> + alarm.pending = 0;
> + alarm.time.tm_mday = -1;
> + alarm.time.tm_mon = -1;
> + alarm.time.tm_year = -1;
> + alarm.time.tm_wday = -1;
> + alarm.time.tm_yday = -1;
> + alarm.time.tm_isdst = -1;
> + err = rtc_set_alarm(class_dev, &alarm);
> + break;
> +
> + case RTC_RD_TIME:
> + if ((err = rtc_read_time(class_dev, &tm)) < 0)
> + return err;
> +
> + if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &tm, sizeof(tm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + break;
> +
> + case RTC_SET_TIME:
> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME))
> + return -EACCES;
> +
> + if ((err = copy_from_user(&tm, uarg, sizeof(tm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + err = rtc_set_time(class_dev, &tm);
> + break;
> +#if 0
> + case RTC_EPOCH_SET:
> +#ifndef rtc_epoch
> + /*
> + * There were no RTC clocks before 1900.
> + */
> + if (arg < 1900) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME)) {
> + err = -EACCES;
> + break;
> + }
> + rtc_epoch = arg;
> + err = 0;
> +#endif
> + break;
> +
> + case RTC_EPOCH_READ:
> + err = put_user(rtc_epoch, (unsigned long __user *)uarg);
> + break;
> +#endif
> + case RTC_WKALM_SET:
> + if ((err = copy_from_user(&alarm, uarg, sizeof(alarm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + err = rtc_set_alarm(class_dev, &alarm);
> + break;
> +
> + case RTC_WKALM_RD:
> + if ((err = rtc_read_alarm(class_dev, &alarm)) < 0)
> + return err;
> +
> + if ((err = copy_to_user(uarg, &alarm, sizeof(alarm))))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + break;
> +
> + default:
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> +
> + if (rtc->ops->release)
> + rtc->ops->release(rtc->class_dev.dev);
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> + rtc->irq_data = 0;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&rtc->irq_lock);
> +
Why is the above needed?
> + up(&rtc->char_sem);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_fasync(int fd, struct file *file, int on)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(file->private_data);
> + return fasync_helper(fd, file, on, &rtc->async_queue);
> +}
> +
> +static struct file_operations rtc_dev_fops = {
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .llseek = no_llseek,
> + .read = rtc_dev_read,
> + .poll = rtc_dev_poll,
> + .ioctl = rtc_dev_ioctl,
> + .open = rtc_dev_open,
> + .release = rtc_dev_release,
> + .fasync = rtc_dev_fasync,
> +};
> +
> +static ssize_t rtc_dev_show_dev(struct class_device *class_dev, char *buf)
> +{
> + return print_dev_t(buf, class_dev->devt);
> +}
> +static CLASS_DEVICE_ATTR(dev, S_IRUGO, rtc_dev_show_dev, NULL);
> +
> +/* insertion/removal hooks */
> +
> +static int rtc_dev_add_device(struct class_device *class_dev,
> + struct class_interface *class_intf)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> +
> + if (rtc->id >= RTC_DEV_MAX) {
> + dev_err(class_dev->dev, "too many RTCs\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + init_MUTEX(&rtc->char_sem);
> + spin_lock_init(&rtc->irq_lock);
> + init_waitqueue_head(&rtc->irq_queue);
> +
> + cdev_init(&rtc->char_dev, &rtc_dev_fops);
> + rtc->char_dev.owner = rtc->owner;
> + class_dev->devt = MKDEV(MAJOR(rtc_devt), rtc->id);
> +
> + if (cdev_add(&rtc->char_dev, class_dev->devt, 1)) {
> + cdev_del(&rtc->char_dev);
> +
> + dev_err(class_dev->dev,
> + "failed to add char device %d:%d\n",
> + MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> + MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> +
> + class_dev->devt = MKDEV(0, 0);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + class_device_create_file(class_dev, &class_device_attr_dev);
> +
> + dev_info(class_dev->dev, "rtc intf: dev (%d:%d)\n",
> + MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> + MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> +
> + kobject_hotplug(&class_dev->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
> +
This is kobject_hotplug abuse; you are not adding a new object here.
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void rtc_dev_remove_device(struct class_device *class_dev,
> + struct class_interface *class_intf)
> +{
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = to_rtc_device(class_dev);
> +
> + class_device_remove_file(class_dev, &class_device_attr_dev);
> +
> + if (MAJOR(class_dev->devt)) {
> + dev_dbg(class_dev->dev, "removing char %d:%d\n",
> + MAJOR(class_dev->devt),
> + MINOR(class_dev->devt));
> + cdev_del(&rtc->char_dev);
> +
> + kobject_hotplug(&class_dev->kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
> +
Same here...
> + class_dev->devt = MKDEV(0, 0);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/* interface registration */
> +
> +struct class_interface rtc_dev_interface = {
> + .add = &rtc_dev_add_device,
> + .remove = &rtc_dev_remove_device,
> +};
> +
I wonder if doing rtc dev as a class device interface is a good idea.
It may be cleaner to fold it into the core.
> +static int __init rtc_dev_init(void)
> +{
> + int err;
> +
> + if ((err = alloc_chrdev_region(&rtc_devt, 0, RTC_DEV_MAX, "rtc")) < 0) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s: failed to allocate char dev region\n",
> + __FILE__);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + if ((err = rtc_interface_register(&rtc_dev_interface)) < 0) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s: failed to register the interface\n",
> + __FILE__);
> + unregister_chrdev_region(rtc_devt, RTC_DEV_MAX);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit rtc_dev_exit(void)
> +{
> + class_interface_unregister(&rtc_dev_interface);
> +
> + unregister_chrdev_region(rtc_devt, RTC_DEV_MAX);
> +}
> +
> +module_init(rtc_dev_init);
> +module_exit(rtc_dev_exit);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Alessandro Zummo <[email protected]>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("RTC class dev interface");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> --- linux-nslu2.orig/drivers/rtc/Kconfig 2006-01-04 01:27:14.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-nslu2/drivers/rtc/Kconfig 2006-01-04 01:27:15.000000000 +0100
> @@ -41,6 +41,17 @@ config RTC_INTF_PROC
> This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
> will be called rtc-proc.
>
> +config RTC_INTF_DEV
> + tristate "dev"
> + depends on RTC_CLASS
> + default RTC_CLASS
> + help
> + Say yes here if you want to use your RTC using the dev
> + interface, /dev/rtc .
> +
> + This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
> + will be called rtc-dev.
> +
> comment "RTC drivers"
> depends on RTC_CLASS
>
> --- linux-nslu2.orig/drivers/rtc/Makefile 2006-01-04 01:27:14.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-nslu2/drivers/rtc/Makefile 2006-01-04 01:27:15.000000000 +0100
> @@ -7,3 +7,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_CLASS) += rtc-core.o
> rtc-core-y := class.o interface.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_SYSFS) += rtc-sysfs.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_PROC) += rtc-proc.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_RTC_INTF_DEV) += rtc-dev.o
>
> --
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
