Re: [PATCH 1/1] iio: fix config watermark initial value

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 16/06/16 17:19, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 06/16/2016 06:16 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 16 June 2016 12:56:11 BST, Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 24/03/16 09:23, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>>>>> On 03/24/2016 10:09 AM, Irina Tirdea wrote:
>>>>>> config structure is set to 0 when updating the buffers, so by
>>>>>> default config->watermark will be 0. When computing the minimum
>>>>>> between config->watermark and the buffer->watermark or
>>>>>> insert_buffer-watermark, this will always be 0 regardless of the
>>>>>> value set by the user for the buffer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Set as initial value for config->watermark the maximum allowed
>>>>>> value so that the minimum value will always be set from one of the
>>>>>> buffers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Irina Tirdea <irina.tirdea@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good. This bug was my fault, sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: f0566c0c405d ("iio: Set device watermark based on watermark
>>> of all
>>>>> attached buffers")
>>>> Applied to the fixes-togreg-post-rc1 branch of iio.git and marked for
>>> stable.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c | 1 +
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
>>> b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
>>>>>> index b976332..90462fc 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
>>>>>> @@ -653,6 +653,7 @@ static int iio_verify_update(struct iio_dev
>>> *indio_dev,
>>>>>>      unsigned int modes;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      memset(config, 0, sizeof(*config));
>>>>>> +    config->watermark = ~0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      /*
>>>>>>       * If there is just one buffer and we are removing it there is
>>> nothing
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>
>>> After a discussion with Laurentiu (Cc'ed), we noticed that this patch
>>> is not in the latest IIO (testing, togreg) tree.
>>>
>>> What is the path of an IIO fixes patch?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Daniel.
>> Should be fixes-togreg then staging-linus then mainline.
> 
> To add to that once it is in mainline it will trickle down again through
> staging/next to iio/togreg. So there might be a fair amount of pipeline
> delay until it arrives in iio/{togreg,testing}.
> 
It's now in staging-next which is the upstream for togreg.
I've been a bit snowed under this week so it might be a little while yet
before I get my next pull request out to Greg and then do a fast
forward merge which will pull that change in.

Thanks,

Jonathan