On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 09:32:06AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 12/6/21 1:31 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 10:53:49PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 08:35:40AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > >>> refcount_t is not as expensive as it used to be, but it's still more > >>> expensive than the io_uring method of using atomic_t and just checking > >>> for potential over/underflow. > >>> > >>> This borrows that same implementation, which in turn is based on the > >>> mm implementation from Linus. > >> > >> If refcount_t isn't good enough for a normal kernel fast path we have > >> a problem. Can we discuss that with the maintainers instead of coming > >> up with our home grown schemes again? > > > > Quite; and for something that pretends to be about performance, it also > > lacks any actual numbers to back that claim. > > I can certainly generate that, it was already done for the two previous > similar conversions though. I've never seen those :-(
