Reshetova, Elena <elena.reshet...@intel.com> wrote: > Thank you very much David for testing the patches! > I guess for this one and other two patches it means that if we want to do the > atomic_t --> refcount_t conversions, > we need to do +1 on the whole counting scheme to avoid issues around reaching > zero. > Do you see this approach reasonable? I can give it a try, if it makes sense > in your opinion.
Or you could create a refcount_inc_may_resurrect() function that does allow increment from 0. Make it take a lock-check like the rcu functions do. David
