Re: [PATCH 23/33] generic dynamic per cpu refcounting

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:36:00PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> It would be nice if we had unsigned atomic types... but given that we
> don't and I'm pretty sure overflow in atomic types happens all over the
> place that part honestly seems fine to me...
> 
> That said, I suppose a comment indicating that it is intentionally
> overflowing is probably merited. Ted, Andrew, is this acceptable to you?

Seems reasonable to me, thanks.

					- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/