On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:34:44 +0200, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 07:53:31PM +0200, Jerome Brunet wrote: > > > With the revert, we are back to the bit ops. Even if it works, Mark's > > original comment on the bit ops still stands I think. This is why I'm > > proposing patch 2 but I don't really mind if it is applied or not. > > Yeah, it's not *required* but the atomic operations have lots of spiky > edges so a simpler locking construct would have less chance of running > into trouble later when someone's updating the code. If that's the reason, it should be mentioned specifically in the commit. That is, it's not about functionality or efficiency but just about the code readability. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
