access it (the pending bit protects us).

     Besides, set_wq_data() _sets_ the workqueue pointer unconditionally, so
     it can be assigned instead.

So, replacing the set_wq_data() with a straight assignment would be okay
in most cases.

The problem is where we end up tangling with test_and_set_bit() emulated
using spinlocks, and even then it's not a problem _provided_
test_and_set_bit() doesn't attempt to modify the word if the bit was
set.

If that's a problem, then a bitops-proofed assignment will be required -
equivalent to atomic_set() vs other atomic_xxx() ops.

Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
ï