On 06/06/2018 14:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 11:16:40AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> + atomic_t idle_duration_ms; >> + atomic_t run_duration_ms; > >> + idle_duration_ms = atomic_read(&ii_dev->idle_duration_ms); > >> + run_duration_ms = atomic_read(&ii_dev->run_duration_ms); > >> + atomic_set(&ii_dev->run_duration_ms, run_duration_ms); >> + atomic_set(&ii_dev->idle_duration_ms, idle_duration_ms); > >> + *run_duration_ms = atomic_read(&ii_dev->run_duration_ms); >> + *idle_duration_ms = atomic_read(&ii_dev->idle_duration_ms); > >> + if (!atomic_read(&ii_dev->idle_duration_ms)) > >> + if (!atomic_read(&ii_dev->run_duration_ms)) > > What is the point of atomic_t here ?!
idle_duration and run_duration can be changed from different places at the same time. The atomic is here to ensure the read/write are consistent. Do you think it is pointless ? -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
