From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hn94p-0004tF-M6 for linux-um@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 15 Jul 2019 22:04:08 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20190712081744.87097-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20190712081744.87097-4-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20190715204356.4E3F92145D@mail.kernel.org> From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/18] kunit: test: add string_stream a std::stream like string builder Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 15:04:06 -0700 Message-Id: <20190715220407.0030420665@mail.kernel.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-um" Errors-To: linux-um-bounces+geert=linux-m68k.org@lists.infradead.org To: Brendan Higgins Cc: Petr Mladek , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , Peter Zijlstra , Amir Goldstein , dri-devel , Sasha Levin , Masahiro Yamada , Michael Ellerman , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , shuah , Rob Herring , linux-nvdimm , Frank Rowand , Knut Omang , Kieran Bingham , wfg@linux.intel.com, Joel Stanley , David Rientjes , Jeff Dike , Dan Carpenter , devicetree , linux-kbuild , "Bird, Timothy , linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Steven Rostedt" , Julia Lawall , Josh Poimboeuf , kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, Theodore Ts'o , Richard Weinberger , Greg KH , Randy Dunlap , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Luis Chamberlain , Daniel Vetter , Kees Cook , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Logan Gunthorpe , Kevin Hilman Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-07-15 14:11:50) > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 1:43 PM Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > I also wonder if it would be better to just have a big slop buffer of a > > 4K page or something so that we almost never have to allocate anything > > with a string_stream and we can just rely on a reader consuming data > > while writers are writing. That might work out better, but I don't quite > > understand the use case for the string stream. > > That makes sense, but might that also waste memory since we will > almost never need that much memory? Why do we care? These are unit tests. Having allocations in here makes things more complicated, whereas it would be simpler to have a pointer and a spinlock operating on a chunk of memory that gets flushed out periodically. _______________________________________________ linux-um mailing list linux-um@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um