On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 03:14:41PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > > Provide refcount_t, an atomic_t like primitive built just for > > refcounting. > > > > It provides overflow and underflow checks as well as saturation > > semantics such that when it overflows, we'll never attempt to free it > > again, ever. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org> > > Hi! > > I see the other 6 patches from this series are in -next, but the > refcount_t implementation is still missing. What's needed to land this > in -next? It's blocking sending the atomic_t -> refcount_t patches, > which will likely all go through various maintainers, so we need to > have refcount_t first. :)
Nothing much, except lack of time. I spend the last several days hunting bugs, that trumps new features on my todo list.
