On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 04:08:16PM -0800, Bryan Tan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:55:30AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > Hm, it's still not clear to me what expectations are not followed here, > and how you're differentiating 'refcount' from 'usecnt'. A refcount is something that has exactly one 'refcount_dec_and_test' that then goes on to 'free' the thing being refcountedt. It never has a wait queue. A usecnt is something that has an async path that waits for all users to stop using it then 'frees' it. It always includes a wait queue. > And not that it makes it right, but I did notice that mlx4 uses the > same pattern as what I've done here [1]. Ah, this is good, I was trying to find something like it. Kees approves so I have no problem taking your patch. Though you might want to reflect on if using a completion is better than a wait_event.. Not immediately clear to me. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
