[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091220052202.GE32739@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:22:02 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Roger Quadros <quadros.roger@...il.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
Shargorodsky Atal <ext-atal.shargorodsky@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] new kqueue API v.08
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 12:25:15AM +0100, Stefani Seibold wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 19.12.2009, 12:36 +0100 schrieb Andi Kleen:
> > I like the basic idea of a type safe FIFO.
> >
> > > #define DYNAMIC
> > > #ifdef DYNAMIC
> > > static DECLARE_KFIFO_PTR(test[1], int);
> > > #else
> > > static DECLARE_KFIFO(test[1], int, FIFO_SIZE);
> >
> > The [1] looks weird. Is that really needed and what does it mean?
> > The callers below don't seem to use it like an array.
>
> I am a lazy girl. This is only for convenient, because i don't want to
> write always kfifo_....(&test...). Using an array of [1] provide the
> pointer automaticly. Of course you can also write
>
> static DECLARE_KFIFO(test, int, FIFO_SIZE);
>
> and then call the kfifo macros with the address of the variable.
So you want test[0] then, not test[1]. Or I'm missing something.
Also, the subject of your mail was a bit misleading, it was talking
about "kqueue" (which is the equivalent of epoll on BSD systems),
while everywhere in the code we see kfifo. I think you simply changed
the name recently for kfifo in fact.
Willy
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists