iio: proximity: vl53l0x-i2c: claim direct mode for raw readsgrafted

vl53l0x_read_raw() starts a single-shot ranging measurement and reads
back the result. Once the triggered buffer is enabled the sensor runs in
continuous mode and its data-ready interrupt is routed to the trigger,
so a concurrent in_distance_raw read disturbs the streaming setup and
never gets its completion, returning -ETIMEDOUT.

The original submission claimed direct mode here, but it was dropped
during review because the driver had no buffer support at the time [1].
Continuous (buffered) mode was later added without restoring the
claim [2], reintroducing the conflict.

Reject direct reads while buffered capture is active by claiming direct
mode around the measurement, as the vl53l1x sibling already does.

Fixes: 762186c6e7b1 ("iio: proximity: vl53l0x-i2c: Added continuous mode support")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/20180911160300.GA9212@himanshu-Vostro-3559/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/20240909101508.263085-3-abhashkumarjha123@gmail.com/ [2]
Signed-off-by: Donggeun Yoo <donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@oss.qualcomm.com>

1 files changed, 46 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/networking/x25.rst b/Documentation/networking/x25.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..e11d9ebdf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/networking/x25.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+==================
+Linux X.25 Project
+==================
+
+As my third year dissertation at University I have taken it upon myself to
+write an X.25 implementation for Linux. My aim is to provide a complete X.25
+Packet Layer and a LAPB module to allow for "normal" X.25 to be run using
+Linux. There are two sorts of X.25 cards available, intelligent ones that
+implement LAPB on the card itself, and unintelligent ones that simply do
+framing, bit-stuffing and checksumming. These both need to be handled by the
+system.
+
+I therefore decided to write the implementation such that as far as the
+Packet Layer is concerned, the link layer was being performed by a lower
+layer of the Linux kernel and therefore it did not concern itself with
+implementation of LAPB. Therefore the LAPB modules would be called by
+unintelligent X.25 card drivers and not by intelligent ones, this would
+provide a uniform device driver interface, and simplify configuration.
+
+To confuse matters a little, an 802.2 LLC implementation is also possible
+which could allow X.25 to be run over an Ethernet (or Token Ring) and
+conform with the JNT "Pink Book", this would have a different interface to
+the Packet Layer but there would be no confusion since the class of device
+being served by the LLC would be completely separate from LAPB.
+
+Just when you thought that it could not become more confusing, another
+option appeared, XOT. This allows X.25 Packet Layer frames to operate over
+the Internet using TCP/IP as a reliable link layer. RFC1613 specifies the
+format and behaviour of the protocol. If time permits this option will also
+be actively considered.
+
+A linux-x25 mailing list has been created at vger.kernel.org to support the
+development and use of Linux X.25. It is early days yet, but interested
+parties are welcome to subscribe to it. Just send a message to
+majordomo@vger.kernel.org with the following in the message body:
+
+subscribe linux-x25
+end
+
+The contents of the Subject line are ignored.
+
+Jonathan
+
+g4klx@g4klx.demon.co.uk