linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/2] new kfifo API

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:41:14 -0500
From:	Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	open-iscsi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] new kfifo API

On 08/03/2009 09:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 03 August 2009, Stefani Seibold wrote:
>> This is a proposal of a new generic kernel FIFO implementation.
>>
>> The current kernel fifo API is not very widely used, because it has to many
>> constrains. Only 13 files in the current 2.6.30 used it. FIFO's are
>> like list are a very basic thing and a kfifo API which handles the most use
>> case would save a lot of time and memory resources.
>>
>> I think there are the following reasons why kfifo is not in use.
>>
>> - There is a need of a spinlock despite you need it or not
>> - A fifo can only allocated dynamically
>> - There is no support for data records inside a fifo
>> - The FIFO size can only a power of two


For iscsi, the only thing we have not liked with the current code is 
having to have the fifo a power of 2. It has not been that big a deal 
though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/