From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752379AbZJYBs2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:48:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752322AbZJYBs1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:48:27 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:36625 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752314AbZJYBs1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:48:27 -0400 Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 02:48:31 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Stefani Seibold Cc: linux-kernel , Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , Andi Kleen , Amerigo Wang , Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] kfifo: new API v0.6 Message-ID: <20091025014831.GC32470@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1256391194.7362.7.camel@wall-e> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1256391194.7362.7.camel@wall-e> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 03:33:14PM +0200, Stefani Seibold wrote: > This is a new generic kernel FIFO implementation. > > The current kernel fifo API is not very widely used, because it has to many > constrains. Only 17 files in the current 2.6.31-rc5 used it. FIFO's are > like list's a very basic thing and a kfifo API which handles the most use > case would save a lot of development time and memory resources. > > I think this are the reasons why kfifo is not in use: > > - The API is to simple, important functions are missing > - A fifo can be only allocated dynamically > - There is a need of a spinlock despite you need it or not > - There is no support for data records inside a fifo I have some plans to use this kfifo code in upcoming code (mostly as a very simple lower overhead NMI safe per CPU fifo). I would appreciate if it could be merged ASAP I didn't review this iteration, but earlier ones. Acked-by: Andi Kleen -Andi