On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:56:28PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > This is all under some lock, right? (If that isn't the case, it's racy) Right. > Therefore, you need not use atomic bitops which will be fairly > expensive... > > Have you actually measured this? It seems that it con't have a huge > effect, and the atomic bitops you use now might even negate it. Like I mentioned in the cover letter, this is more of a cosmetic change than a real optimization. It doesn't really improve performance, but the code looks nicer. Using non atomic bitops cannot hurt, I guess. Thanks, Ido. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
