Commit a0244a8d authored by Jason A. Donenfeld's avatar Jason A. Donenfeld Committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman

kref: prefer atomic_inc_not_zero to atomic_add_unless

On most platforms, there exists this ifdef:

 #define atomic_inc_not_zero(v) atomic_add_unless((v), 1, 0)

This makes this patch functionally useless. However, on PPC, there is
actually an explicit definition of atomic_inc_not_zero with its own
assembly that is slightly more optimized than atomic_add_unless. So,
this patch changes kref to use atomic_inc_not_zero instead, for PPC and
any future platforms that might provide an explicit implementation.

This also puts this usage of kref more in line with a verbatim reading
of the examples in Paul McKenney's paper [1] in the section titled "2.4
Atomic Counting With Check and Release Memory Barrier", which uses
atomic_inc_not_zero.

[1] http://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2167.pdfSigned-off-by: default avatarJason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarThomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
parent e41746b0
......@@ -133,6 +133,6 @@ static inline int kref_put_mutex(struct kref *kref,
*/
static inline int __must_check kref_get_unless_zero(struct kref *kref)
{
return atomic_add_unless(&kref->refcount, 1, 0);
return atomic_inc_not_zero(&kref->refcount);
}
#endif /* _KREF_H_ */
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment