On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 09:41:37PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > pet...@infradead.org wrote: > > > I'm not entirely sure what you mean with interpret, provided you don't > > trigger a refcount fail, the number will be just what you expect and > > would get from refcount_read(). If you do trigger a fail, you'll get a > > negative value. > > That's fine. I seem to remember talk about the possibility that the number > wouldn't necessarily bottom out at zero - for instance if it was arranged such > that the overflow flag was set on an overflow or underflow so that it could be > trapped on (using INTO or TRAPV, for example).
The trap is an internal detail. The saturation value will be negative, though. -- Kees Cook
