Re: [PATCH 04/21] Generic percpu refcounting

[Kent Overstreet]

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 05:28:36PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 05/14, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
> > > +int percpu_ref_tryget(struct percpu_ref *ref)
> > > +{
> > > +	int ret = 1;
> > > +
> > > +	preempt_disable();
> > > +
> > > +	if (!percpu_ref_dead(ref))
> > > +		percpu_ref_get(ref);
> > > +	else
> > > +		ret = 0;
> > > +
> > > +	preempt_enable();
> > > +
> > > +	return ret;
> > > +}
> ...
> > BTW, why is this
> > function necessary?  What's the use case?
> 
> Yes, I was wondering too.
> 
> And please note that this code _looks_ wrong, percpu_ref_get() still
> can increment ref->count.

Yeah I see what you mean, I changed how ret is set.

But also splitting tryget() and count() out into another patch to go
with the module conversion.

> Hmm. Just noticed this comment above percpu_ref_kill()
> 
> 	* The caller must issue a synchronize_rcu()/call_rcu() before calling
> 	* percpu_ref_put() to drop the initial ref.
> 
> Really?

That's also left over from the dynamic version, whoops.
--
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/