Re: [PATCH 05/17] lib: percpu_count_sum_signed()

[Josef Sipek <jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:58:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
> 
> Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
> with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive
> percpu_counter_sum() instead?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> ---
>  include/linux/percpu_counter.h |   18 +++++++++++++++++-
>  lib/percpu_counter.c           |    6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/percpu_counter.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/percpu_counter.h	2007-05-23 20:37:54.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/percpu_counter.h	2007-05-23 20:38:09.000000000 +0200
> @@ -35,7 +35,18 @@ void percpu_counter_destroy(struct percp
>  void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount);
>  void __percpu_counter_mod(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s32 amount, s32 batch);
>  void __percpu_counter_mod64(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount, s32 batch);
> -s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc);
> +s64 __percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc);
> +
> +static inline s64 percpu_counter_sum(struct percpu_counter *fbc)
> +{
> +	s64 ret = __percpu_counter_sum(fbc);
> +	return ret < 0 ? 0 : ret;

max(0, ret) maybe?

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

-- 
Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a
concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a
"you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic,
powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/