On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 08:58:25PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2023-11-18 at 07:50 -0800, Yury Norov wrote:
> > iwlegacy and iwlwifi code opencodes atomic bit allocation/traversing by
> > using loops.
>
> That's really just due to being lazy though, it could use a non-atomic
> __test_and_set_bit() would be just fine in all of this, there's always a
> mutex held around it that protects the data.
Ok, then I'll drop the patch.
> Not that it means that the helper is _wrong_, it's just unnecessary, and
> you don't have non-atomic versions of these, do you?
Not yet. If atomic find_bit() will get merged, and there will be a
set of potential users of non-atomic version, I may need to revisit
it and add those non-atomic functions.
Thanks,
Yury
