linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] new kfifo API v0.3 - add DEFINE_KFIFO and friends, add very tiny functions

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]

Message-Id: <1250269434.5644.15.camel@wall-e>
Date:	Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:03:54 +0200
From:	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] new kfifo API v0.3 - add DEFINE_KFIFO and friends,
 add very tiny functions

Am Freitag, den 14.08.2009, 08:20 -0700 schrieb Joe Perches:
> On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 13:44 +0200, Stefani Seibold wrote:
> 
> Couple of trivial comments
> 
> > This is patch 4/6 of the new kfifo API:
> >  Add KFIFO_INIT - macro to generate a kfifo initializer
> 
> Is it really necessary to use KFIFO_INIT and INIT_KFIFO?
> I think it'll cause confusion and misuse.

You are right.

> > + * KFIFO_INIT - macro to generate a kfifo initializer
> > + * @s: size of the fifo buffer
> > + * @b: address of the fifo buffer
> > + */
> > +#define KFIFO_INIT(s, b) \
> > +	(struct kfifo) { \
> > +		.size	= s, \
> > +		.in	= 0, \
> > +		.out	= 0, \
> > +		.buffer = b \
> > +	}
> >
> > +/**
> > + * INIT_KFIFO - macro to initialize a with DECLARE_KFIFO declared kfifo
> > + * @name: name of the declared kfifo datatype
> > + * @size: size of the fifo buffer
> > + */
> > +#define INIT_KFIFO(name) \
> > +	name = KFIFO_INIT(sizeof(name##_buffer) - sizeof(struct kfifo), \
> > +				name##_buffer)
> 
> Perhaps
> 
> #define __kfifo_initializer ?
> 

I like your idea to rename into __kfifo_initializer. It is only for internal use.

>  
> 
> > Add INIT_KFIFO - macro to initialize a with DECLARE_KFIFO declared kfifo 
> 
> What does the description mean?

Exactly what it meas. If you declare a kfifo with DECLARE_KIFO than you
must initialize this fifo which INIT_KFIFO.
  
> 
> > Add DEFINE_KFIFO - macro to define and initialize a kfifo as a global or local object
> 
> What does this mean?  Is scope relevant to the macro?
> 

Yes, the scope is relevant, because i found no way to use unnamed unions
for global or local declarations in a way i need it.
 
> I think you should mention somewhere that these macros
> actually define 2 objects.  "name##_buffer" might have
> unexpected clashes and be prefixed with kfifo.
> maybe something like "kfifo_##name##_buffer"?
> 

Maybe name it name##_kfifo_buffer?

But before doing this i will wait for more response and for inclusion
into -mm. If i get an okay i will do a maintainance patch. It is to much
work to handle this splitted patches.

Grettings,
Stefani


--
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/