On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 12:23:03PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: > > Agreed: this is a clear wrapping sequence counter. It's only abuse would > > be using it in a place where wrapping actually is _not_ safe. (bikeshed: > > can we call it wrap_u32 and wrap_u64?) > > Still like seqnum_ops. > > There is seqcount_t in seqlock.h which is a totally different feature. Yes, and that's why this new thing, whatever it is called should not have the word "sequence" in it. People will get it confused. Also, "ops" in Linux means "vector of methods", like a_ops, f_op, i_op, fl_ops.
