lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] [0/6] kfifo fixes/improvements
    From
    Date
    Am Montag, den 28.12.2009, 18:26 +0100 schrieb Andi Kleen:
    > First having to rely on another large patchkit makes
    > it annoying to develop for this (it's the linux kernel
    > equivalent of DLL hell), but ok. I hope the interface
    > doesn't change again at least.
    >

    The interface hasn't been changed, only the implementation. So it should
    be not a big issue for the users of the kfifo API! Programming is
    sometimes like evolution. But i think the macro based version is now the
    right and best solution which a lot of benefits for the users.

    > > So please draw back this patch, you will get exactly what you want and
    > > need in the next release. I have now a clean, slim and fast
    > > implementation. All what i need is a review and some ack's
    >
    > How about the current users for 2.6.33? Unless they are not
    > record oriented or always put in power-of-two records they will
    > need this patch, otherwise they risk desynchronization on fifo
    > full.
    >
    > I think the patch is needed.
    >

    It is exactly the same behavior as the old kfifo API, so no user relies
    on the new "kfifo_in atomic" feature. The only user is you. And it is
    easy for you to to check if enough room is available with kfifo_avail()
    before calling kfifo_in(). That is exactly what your patch do inside the
    kfifo_in() function.

    > Also should drop the unused interfaces for 2.6.33 before anyone
    > else tries to use them and gets the same nasty surprise as me.
    >

    Nasty surprise? Sorry, but i accepted all your patches, excluded one,
    which breaks my future work. And i implemented all your suggestions in
    my new macro based kfifo API in less than a day. So where is the
    problem? You modified the interface not me! Nobody relies currently on
    your patches, it's only you.

    I will send a patch to Andrew for removing kfifo_*_rec() functions if
    you like and i hope for your cooperation. Again please draw back your
    "kfifo_in atomic" patch.

    And for 2.6.34 everything will be fine :-)

    Stefani




    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-28 21:07    [W:0.025 / U:30.464 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site