In order to eventually unify the locking API, implement
iio_device_claim_direct() fully inline, with the use of
__iio_dev_mode_lock(), which takes care of sparse annotations.
Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Reviewed-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com>
Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com>
---
drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c | 44 -----------------------------------------
include/linux/iio/iio.h | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
index db803267df6e..0f8e3aa98b72 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
@@ -2201,50 +2201,6 @@ void __iio_dev_mode_unlock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_dev_mode_unlock);
-/**
- * __iio_device_claim_direct - Keep device in direct mode
- * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
- *
- * If the device is in direct mode it is guaranteed to stay
- * that way until __iio_device_release_direct() is called.
- *
- * Use with __iio_device_release_direct().
- *
- * Drivers should only call iio_device_claim_direct().
- *
- * Returns: true on success, false on failure.
- */
-bool __iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
-{
- struct iio_dev_opaque *iio_dev_opaque = to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev);
-
- mutex_lock(&iio_dev_opaque->mlock);
-
- if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
- mutex_unlock(&iio_dev_opaque->mlock);
- return false;
- }
- return true;
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_device_claim_direct);
-
-/**
- * __iio_device_release_direct - releases claim on direct mode
- * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
- *
- * Release the claim. Device is no longer guaranteed to stay
- * in direct mode.
- *
- * Drivers should only call iio_device_release_direct().
- *
- * Use with __iio_device_claim_direct()
- */
-void __iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
-{
- mutex_unlock(&to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev)->mlock);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_device_release_direct);
-
/**
* iio_device_claim_buffer_mode - Keep device in buffer mode
* @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
diff --git a/include/linux/iio/iio.h b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
index aecda887d833..e263ab5eeccf 100644
--- a/include/linux/iio/iio.h
+++ b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
@@ -664,31 +664,47 @@ int iio_push_event(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u64 ev_code, s64 timestamp);
void __iio_dev_mode_lock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev) __acquires(indio_dev);
void __iio_dev_mode_unlock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev) __releases(indio_dev);
-bool __iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
-void __iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
/*
* Helper functions that allow claim and release of direct mode
* in a fashion that doesn't generate many false positives from sparse.
* Note this must remain static inline in the header so that sparse
- * can see the __acquire() marking. Revisit when sparse supports
- * __cond_acquires()
+ * can see the __acquires() and __releases() annotations.
+ */
+
+/**
+ * iio_device_claim_direct() - Keep device in direct mode
+ * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
+ *
+ * If the device is in direct mode it is guaranteed to stay
+ * that way until iio_device_release_direct() is called.
+ *
+ * Use with iio_device_release_direct().
+ *
+ * Returns: true on success, false on failure.
*/
static inline bool iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
{
- if (!__iio_device_claim_direct(indio_dev))
- return false;
+ __iio_dev_mode_lock(indio_dev);
- __acquire(iio_dev);
+ if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
+ __iio_dev_mode_unlock(indio_dev);
+ return false;
+ }
return true;
}
-static inline void iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
-{
- __iio_device_release_direct(indio_dev);
- __release(indio_dev);
-}
+/**
+ * iio_device_release_direct() - Releases claim on direct mode
+ * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
+ *
+ * Release the claim. Device is no longer guaranteed to stay
+ * in direct mode.
+ *
+ * Use with iio_device_claim_direct().
+ */
+#define iio_device_release_direct(indio_dev) __iio_dev_mode_unlock(indio_dev)
int iio_device_claim_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
void iio_device_release_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
--
2.52.0
On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:20:42 -0500
Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote:
> In order to eventually unify the locking API, implement
> iio_device_claim_direct() fully inline, with the use of
> __iio_dev_mode_lock(), which takes care of sparse annotations.
>
> Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
> Reviewed-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com>
So sparse does change what it moans about with this one in precisely one instance
There are 9 false positives with Al Viro's updated sparse - I haven't checked the
original one recently.
Anyhow,
drivers/iio/adc/ad7173.c:416:12: warning: context imbalance in 'ad7173_set_filter_type' - different lock contexts for basic block
becomes
drivers/iio/adc/ad7173.c:425:9: warning: context imbalance in 'ad7173_set_filter_type' - unexpected unlock
Lets go with a bit meh for that and move on...
> ---
> drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c | 44 -----------------------------------------
> include/linux/iio/iio.h | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> index db803267df6e..0f8e3aa98b72 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> @@ -2201,50 +2201,6 @@ void __iio_dev_mode_unlock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_dev_mode_unlock);
>
> -/**
> - * __iio_device_claim_direct - Keep device in direct mode
> - * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
> - *
> - * If the device is in direct mode it is guaranteed to stay
> - * that way until __iio_device_release_direct() is called.
> - *
> - * Use with __iio_device_release_direct().
> - *
> - * Drivers should only call iio_device_claim_direct().
> - *
> - * Returns: true on success, false on failure.
> - */
> -bool __iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> -{
> - struct iio_dev_opaque *iio_dev_opaque = to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev);
> -
> - mutex_lock(&iio_dev_opaque->mlock);
> -
> - if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
> - mutex_unlock(&iio_dev_opaque->mlock);
> - return false;
> - }
> - return true;
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_device_claim_direct);
> -
> -/**
> - * __iio_device_release_direct - releases claim on direct mode
> - * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
> - *
> - * Release the claim. Device is no longer guaranteed to stay
> - * in direct mode.
> - *
> - * Drivers should only call iio_device_release_direct().
> - *
> - * Use with __iio_device_claim_direct()
> - */
> -void __iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> -{
> - mutex_unlock(&to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev)->mlock);
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__iio_device_release_direct);
> -
> /**
> * iio_device_claim_buffer_mode - Keep device in buffer mode
> * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
> diff --git a/include/linux/iio/iio.h b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> index aecda887d833..e263ab5eeccf 100644
> --- a/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/iio/iio.h
> @@ -664,31 +664,47 @@ int iio_push_event(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, u64 ev_code, s64 timestamp);
>
> void __iio_dev_mode_lock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev) __acquires(indio_dev);
> void __iio_dev_mode_unlock(struct iio_dev *indio_dev) __releases(indio_dev);
> -bool __iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> -void __iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
>
> /*
> * Helper functions that allow claim and release of direct mode
> * in a fashion that doesn't generate many false positives from sparse.
> * Note this must remain static inline in the header so that sparse
> - * can see the __acquire() marking. Revisit when sparse supports
> - * __cond_acquires()
> + * can see the __acquires() and __releases() annotations.
> + */
> +
> +/**
> + * iio_device_claim_direct() - Keep device in direct mode
> + * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
> + *
> + * If the device is in direct mode it is guaranteed to stay
> + * that way until iio_device_release_direct() is called.
> + *
> + * Use with iio_device_release_direct().
> + *
> + * Returns: true on success, false on failure.
> */
> static inline bool iio_device_claim_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> {
> - if (!__iio_device_claim_direct(indio_dev))
> - return false;
> + __iio_dev_mode_lock(indio_dev);
>
> - __acquire(iio_dev);
> + if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
> + __iio_dev_mode_unlock(indio_dev);
> + return false;
> + }
>
> return true;
> }
>
> -static inline void iio_device_release_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> -{
> - __iio_device_release_direct(indio_dev);
> - __release(indio_dev);
> -}
> +/**
> + * iio_device_release_direct() - Releases claim on direct mode
> + * @indio_dev: the iio_dev associated with the device
> + *
> + * Release the claim. Device is no longer guaranteed to stay
> + * in direct mode.
> + *
> + * Use with iio_device_claim_direct().
> + */
> +#define iio_device_release_direct(indio_dev) __iio_dev_mode_unlock(indio_dev)
>
> int iio_device_claim_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
> void iio_device_release_buffer_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev);
>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 07:04:01PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:20:42 -0500 > Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote: ... > So sparse does change what it moans about with this one in precisely one instance > There are 9 false positives with Al Viro's updated sparse - I haven't checked the > original one recently. FWIW, I also switched to use Al's branch of sparse and recommended LKP to use that as well. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, 23 Jan 2026 10:01:41 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 07:04:01PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:20:42 -0500 > > Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... > > > So sparse does change what it moans about with this one in precisely one instance > > There are 9 false positives with Al Viro's updated sparse - I haven't checked the > > original one recently. > > FWIW, I also switched to use Al's branch of sparse and recommended LKP to use > that as well. > Agreed, that will help with most of the false positives but not all :(
On Thu Jan 22, 2026 at 2:04 PM -05, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:20:42 -0500 > Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In order to eventually unify the locking API, implement >> iio_device_claim_direct() fully inline, with the use of >> __iio_dev_mode_lock(), which takes care of sparse annotations. >> >> Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> >> Reviewed-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> >> Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> > > So sparse does change what it moans about with this one in precisely one instance > There are 9 false positives with Al Viro's updated sparse - I haven't checked the > original one recently. Hi Jonathan, Upstream sparse is kinda broken right now. I'm not getting any false positives on the locking stuff but a BUNCH of "error: bad constant expresion" on MODULE_*() macros so I don't fully trust it. I know at least one subsystem maintainer is getting these too so I guess it's an upstream problem. > > Anyhow, > drivers/iio/adc/ad7173.c:416:12: warning: context imbalance in 'ad7173_set_filter_type' - different lock contexts for basic block > becomes > > drivers/iio/adc/ad7173.c:425:9: warning: context imbalance in 'ad7173_set_filter_type' - unexpected unlock This one is interesting because I can't figure out why sparse hates it. > > Lets go with a bit meh for that and move on... > -- Thanks, ~ Kurt
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 05:20:55PM -0500, Kurt Borja wrote: > On Thu Jan 22, 2026 at 2:04 PM -05, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 01:20:42 -0500 > > Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote: ... > > So sparse does change what it moans about with this one in precisely one instance > > There are 9 false positives with Al Viro's updated sparse - I haven't checked the > > original one recently. > > Hi Jonathan, > > Upstream sparse is kinda broken right now. Yep, please switch to Al's version. > I'm not getting any false positives on the locking stuff but a BUNCH of > "error: bad constant expresion" on MODULE_*() macros so I don't fully > trust it. > > I know at least one subsystem maintainer is getting these too so I guess > it's an upstream problem. Yes, it's fixed in Al's version. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.