[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 09:23:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: corbet@....net, keescook@...omium.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] seqnum_ops: Introduce Sequence Number Ops
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:53:27PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> + * The interface provides:
> + * seqnum32 & seqnum64 functions:
> + * initialization
> + * set
> + * read
> + * increment and no return
> + * decrement and no return
NAK, this is batshit insane again. If you want a sequence number, the
one and _ONLY_ primitive you want to expose is inc_return.
No set, no read, no inc, and most certainly, not dec.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists