From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267494AbUGNSF4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:05:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267495AbUGNSF4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:05:56 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:55486 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267494AbUGNSFy (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:05:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:03:44 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Dipankar Sarma Cc: Ravikiran G Thirumalai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Refcounting of objects part of a lockfree collection Message-ID: <20040714180344.GA22593@kroah.com> References: <20040714045345.GA1220@obelix.in.ibm.com> <20040714070700.GA12579@kroah.com> <20040714082621.GA4291@in.ibm.com> <20040714142614.GA15742@kroah.com> <20040714152235.GA5956@in.ibm.com> <20040714170336.GB4636@kroah.com> <20040714174948.GA3935@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040714174948.GA3935@in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:19:49PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:03:37AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 08:52:35PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote: > > > He is just adding lock-free support from an existing refcounting > > > mechanism that is used in VFS. > > > > If this is true, then I strongly object to the naming of this file, and > > the name of the typedef (which shouldn't be a typedef at all) and this > > should be made a private data structure to the vfs so no one else tries > > to use it. Otherwise it will be used. > > I am reasonably sure that when that patch was done (months ago) kref wasn't > there. Now that kref.[ch] is around, everything can be put there. I agree. > Now, if struct kref is shrinked (want patch ? ;-), all this > can possibly be nicely collapsed into one set of APIs for refcounting. Sounds good to me. > There aren't many users of kref yet, so this seems like a good > time to do it. Was there any objection to shrinking it ? None that I know of. In fact, it's on my list of things to do, so a patch from someone else to fix this would be greatly appreciated. thanks, greg k-h