lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] kref: Implement using refcount_t
Date
> Could you please fix you mailer to not unwrap the emails?

I wish I understand what you mean by "unwrap"... ?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:47:40AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> >Provide refcount_t, an atomic_t like primitive built just for
> >refcounting. It provides overflow and underflow checks as well as
> >saturation semantics such that when it overflows, we'll never attempt
> >to free it again, ever.
>
> >Peter do you have the changes to the refcount_t interface compare to
> >the version in this patch? We are now starting working on atomic_t
> >--> refcount_t conversions and it would save a bit of work to have
> >latest version from you that we can be based upon.
>
> Oh, and if we define refcount_t to be just atomic_t underneath, what
> about the other atomic_long_t, local_t and atomic64_t cases when it is
> used for recounting? I don't feel good just simply changing them to
> become atomic_t under refcount_t wrapper.....

> Is there anybody using local_t ? That seems 'creative' and highly questionable.
I am not yet sure about refcounts, but local_t itself is used in couple of places.

>As for atomic_long_t there's very few, I'd leave them be for now,
Ok, I have started a list on them to keep track, but we need to do them also. There is no reason for them not to be refcounts, since so far the ones I see are classical refcounts.

>and I couldn't find a single atomic64_t refcount user.
I will check when I get over the atomic_t and atomic_long.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-11-18 17:59    [W:0.108 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site