On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 4:34 PM Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/20/24 9:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > try_cmpxchg() loop with constant "new" value can be substituted > > with just xchg() to atomically get and clear the location. > > You're right. With a constant new value (0), there is no need > to loop to ensure we get a "stable" update. > > Is the READ_ONCE() is still needed? No, xchg() guarantees atomic access on its own. Uros.