Re: [RFC PATCH 02/11] refcount: Implement inc/decrement-and-return functions

[David Howells]

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > 	unsigned int refcount_dec_return(refcount_t *r);
> > 	unsigned int refcount_inc_return(refcount_t *r);
> > 
> 
> I'm not immediately seeing how wanting 1 to mean unused leads to
> requiring these two functions.

Did you read the other other part of the description?

	Further, both functions can be used to accurately trace the refcount
	(refcount_inc() followed by refcount_read() can't be considered
	accurate).

> If you'll remember, I did that for inode_count and only needed
> dec_unless().

I don't remember.  inode_count?  I can't find such a thing - did you mean
i_count?  I don't find anything matching "dec_unless.*i_count" either.

David