Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new kqueue API v.08 | From | Stefani Seibold <> | Date | Sun, 20 Dec 2009 00:25:15 +0100 |
| |
Am Samstag, den 19.12.2009, 12:36 +0100 schrieb Andi Kleen: > I like the basic idea of a type safe FIFO. > > > #define DYNAMIC > > #ifdef DYNAMIC > > static DECLARE_KFIFO_PTR(test[1], int); > > #else > > static DECLARE_KFIFO(test[1], int, FIFO_SIZE); > > The [1] looks weird. Is that really needed and what does it mean? > The callers below don't seem to use it like an array.
I am a lazy girl. This is only for convenient, because i don't want to write always kfifo_....(&test...). Using an array of [1] provide the pointer automaticly. Of course you can also write
static DECLARE_KFIFO(test, int, FIFO_SIZE);
and then call the kfifo macros with the address of the variable. > > > I know that this kind of macros are very sophisticated and not easy to > > maintain. But i have all tested and it works as expected. I analyzed the > > output of the compiler and for the x86 the code is as good as hand > > written assembler code. > > Linux has a long tradition of complicated macros in headers, that shouldn't be a > problem. >
I know, but this are in my opinion the most complicated macros for linux.
> > include/linux/kfifo.h | 1107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > > kernel/kfifo.c | 768 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > 2 files changed, 1174 insertions(+), 701 deletions(-) > > > > diff -u -N -r -p mmotm.orig/include/linux/kfifo.h mmotm.new/include/linux/kfifo.h > > --- mmotm.orig/include/linux/kfifo.h 2009-12-19 00:23:12.510334931 +0100 > > +++ mmotm.new/include/linux/kfifo.h 2009-12-19 00:23:04.375307229 +0100 > > @@ -1,8 +1,7 @@ > > /* > > - * A generic kernel FIFO implementation. > > + * A generic kernel fifo implementation > > * > > * Copyright (C) 2009 Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net> > > - * Copyright (C) 2004 Stelian Pop <stelian@popies.net> > > You should probably keep the old copyright, even if not much code remains. >
No, all previous code has gone. I use the counter fifo technique since many years, so the basic idea is very old. > > +#ifdef __KERNEL__ > > #include <linux/kernel.h> > > #include <linux/spinlock.h> > > +#include <linux/stddef.h> > > +#include <linux/scatterlist.h> > > +#else > > +#include "helper.h" > > +#endif > > Such ifdefs should not make it into submitted code. Better use more glue > in the test program.
Will be fixed after review.
> > > ... didn't review the whole thing at this point ...
Would be great if you can do this.
Stefani
| |