lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
>
> You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
> typically dec_and_lock is fairly refcounty, but I suppose it is possible
> to have !refcount users, in which case we're eternally stuck with it.

Yes, there are - consider e.g.

void iput(struct inode *inode)
{
if (!inode)
return;
BUG_ON(inode->i_state & I_CLEAR);
retry:
if (atomic_dec_and_lock(&inode->i_count, &inode->i_lock)) {

inode->i_count sure as hell isn't refcount_t fodder...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-04 18:27    [W:0.048 / U:3.992 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site