From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752647AbcKSHOO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2016 02:14:14 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:29207 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751152AbcKSHON (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2016 02:14:13 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,662,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="32453963" From: "Reshetova, Elena" To: Peter Zijlstra CC: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "keescook@chromium.org" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@kernel.org" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "dave@progbits.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] kref: Implement using refcount_t Thread-Topic: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] kref: Implement using refcount_t Thread-Index: AQHSPp8nZI2aGULSnkSyKlUn6xiKNqDeiSUQgAALYCCAAAHXAIAAZSTwgAAhdYCAAMzXQA== Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 07:14:08 +0000 Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41C14F79@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20161114173946.501528675@infradead.org> <20161114174446.832175072@infradead.org> <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41C14924@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <20161118105206.GM3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41C14B3B@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <20161118185351.GW3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20161118185351.GW3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:58:52PM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > > > Could you please fix you mailer to not unwrap the emails? > > > > I wish I understand what you mean by "unwrap"... ? > > Where I always have lines wrapped at 78 characters, but often when I see > them back in your reply, they're unwrapped and go on forever. > > For some reason your mailer reflows text and mucks with whitespace. I > know Outlook likes to do this by default. Ok, I think I managed to fix it. Hope it looks better now. > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:47:40AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > > > > 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. > > Sure, there's local_t usage, but I'd be very surprised if there's a > single refcount usage among them. > > > >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. > > Well, if you get to tools (cocci script or whatever) to reliably work > fork atomic_t, then converting the few atomic_long_t's later should be > trivial. I am using coccinelle to find all occurrences, but I do the changes only in semi-automated fashion. Each change needs a proper manual review anyway and often one variable usage is spread between different headers/source files, so I prefer not to go to full automation and then not being sure what I have done.