Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:42:05 +0900 | From | Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] ring-buffer: Introducing ring-buffer mapping functions |
| |
On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 15:13:51 +0000 Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com> wrote:
> > > @@ -388,6 +389,7 @@ struct rb_irq_work { > > > bool waiters_pending; > > > bool full_waiters_pending; > > > bool wakeup_full; > > > + bool is_cpu_buffer; > > > > I think 'is_cpu_buffer' is a bit unclear (or generic), > > what about 'meta_page_update'? > > Hum not sure about that change. This was really to identify if parent of > rb_irq_work is a cpu_buffer or a trace_buffer. It can be a cpu_buffer regardless > of the need to update the meta-page.
Yeah, I just meant that is "for_cpu_buffer", not "rb_irq_work is_cpu_buffer". So when reading the code, I just felt uncomfortable.
Thank you,
-- Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
| |