@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static unsigned int debug;
static int poll = DEFAULT_TRANSP_BURST_SZ;
static LIST_HEAD(HFClist);
-static DEFINE_RWLOCK(HFClock);
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(HFClock);
MODULE_AUTHOR("Martin Bachem");
@@ -1895,9 +1895,9 @@ setup_instance(struct hfcsusb *hw, struct device *parent)
goto out;
hfcsusb_cnt++;
- write_lock_irqsave(&HFClock, flags);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&HFClock, flags);
list_add_tail(&hw->list, &HFClist);
- write_unlock_irqrestore(&HFClock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&HFClock, flags);
return 0;
out:
The 'HFClock', an rwlock, is only used by writers, making it functionally equivalent to a spinlock. According to Documentation/locking/spinlocks.rst: "Reader-writer locks require more atomic memory operations than simple spinlocks. Unless the reader critical section is long, you are better off just using spinlocks." Since read_lock() is never called, switching to a spinlock reduces overhead and improves efficiency. Signed-off-by: Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@gmail.com> --- Build tested only, as I don't have the hardware. Ensured all rw_lock -> spinlock conversions are complete, and replacing rw_lock with spinlock should always be safe. drivers/isdn/hardware/mISDN/hfcsusb.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)