Hi Hans,

On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 03:11:48PM +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> The __v4l2_ctrl_modify_range is the unlocked variant, so the comment about
> taking a lock is obviously wrong.

The comment is wrong but I don't think it's a good idea either to leave the
matter undocumented.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verk...@cisco.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h b/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> index 5253b5471897..33ce194a7481 100644
> --- a/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> +++ b/include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h
> @@ -760,9 +760,6 @@ void v4l2_ctrl_grab(struct v4l2_ctrl *ctrl, bool grabbed);
>   *
>   * An error is returned if one of the range arguments is invalid for this
>   * control type.
> - *
> - * This function assumes that the control handler is not locked and will
> - * take the lock itself.

How about:

    * The caller must be holding the control handler lock before calling
    * this function.

With that or something alike,

Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com>

>   */
>  int __v4l2_ctrl_modify_range(struct v4l2_ctrl *ctrl,
>                            s64 min, s64 max, u64 step, s64 def);

-- 
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com

Reply via email to