[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKbEznt7ZhN9gZWy-7wHhFhwbF8XtCGrukuxe4eAFZpfxfu6vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 16:17:06 +0900
From: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: trigger: Avoid data race
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 6:19 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 11:10 PM Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 5:25 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:05 PM Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > At bare minimum they are not relevant to the patch change and haven't
> > > been described in the commit messages.
> >
> > Hi Andy, thanks for your review.
> > I initially skipped this part as I thought it was minor.
> > But on a second look, it seems better to separate the declaration from
> > the logic.
> >
> > What do you think about the data race logic? Would it make sense?
>
> The point is valid, the atomic_read() + atomic_set() is 101 thingy,
> whoever did that doesn't really have a clue what atomic(ity) is.
Thanks for your explanation.
Then I’ll send a v2 patch with only the `int i` change, following the
review feedback.
--
Best regards,
Gyeyoung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists