Le 30/04/2023 à 17:49, Mark Brown a écrit :
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:35:35AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
Accesses to 'minors' are guarded by the 'device_list_lock' mutex. So, it is
safe to use the non-atomic version of (set|clear)_bit() in the
corresponding sections.
Is it a problem to use the atomic version?
Not at all. It just wastes a few cycles (in a place where it doesn't
matter).
I spotted it while looking for some other patterns, so I sent a patch
for it.
if (status == 0) {
- set_bit(minor, minors);
+ __set_bit(minor, minors);
list_add(&spidev->device_entry, &device_list);
The __ usually means something is the more complicated and less
preferred API.
Ok, let keep things as-is and simple then.
Performance doesn't matter here, anyway.
CJ
