On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 12:54:11 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 12:24:28PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > Well, I took your patch 3 just because you wanted to have a protection > > of your data from both get/put callback and from another code path in > > another patch. It was an (ab)use of controls->rwsem that couldn't be > > accepted, so the patch 3 was taken as an alternative. > > > > If this isn't the scenario, let me know: I'd rather drop the patch > > again, as it's superfluous. > > > ok, then please drop it. > > you're quite right that this is the scenario, but i can do that > selectively just as well, like it already is the case in some other > callbacks. i just wanted to have this patch first if it was to be > applied at all, because it seemed cleaner. OK, dropped now. thanks, Takashi
