On 10/7/24 10:14 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/7/24 7:06 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Still seems way over engineered, just use an atomic_long_t for a >> continually increasing index number. > > Even an atomic_long_t can wrap around and hence can result in duplicate > slab cache names. With my patch it is guaranteed that slab cache names > are unique. I'm not claiming that this patch is the best possible > solution but it's a working solution and a solution that doesn't require > too many changes to the ib_srpt driver. Come on... The current patch doesn't even check if ida_alloc() got an ID. Without that, using some mechanism to alloc+free an index is surely less than useful. -- Jens Axboe
