From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757311Ab0E1Kcp (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2010 06:32:45 -0400 Received: from www84.your-server.de ([213.133.104.84]:42151 "EHLO www84.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754956Ab0E1Kcn (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2010 06:32:43 -0400 Subject: Re: really generic, type save and type definable. From: Stefani Seibold To: Henrik Rydberg Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, andi@firstfloor.org, gregkh@suse.de, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, tytso@mit.edu, iws@ovro.caltech.edu In-Reply-To: <4BFF7418.8020607@euromail.se> References: <1273654167-31067-1-git-send-email-stefani@seibold.net> <4BFF7418.8020607@euromail.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 12:32:27 +0200 Message-ID: <1275042747.23895.5.camel@wall-e.seibold.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: stefani@seibold.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, den 28.05.2010, 09:43 +0200 schrieb Henrik Rydberg: > stefani@seibold.net wrote: > [...] > > The main goal was to provide an API which is very intuitive, save and easy > > to use. So linux will get now a powerful fifo API which provides all what > > a developer needs. This will save in the future a lot of kernel space, since > > there is no need to write an own implementation. Most of the device driver > > developers need a fifo, and also deep kernel development will gain benefit > > from this API. > > The meaning of the term "multiple readers" referred to in the header is somewhat > ambiguous. It could in principle refer to concurrent reading of the same > position, or concurrent reading from different positions. Imaginably, those > cases also have different locking behavior. > > What happens if two fifos are initialized with the same memory buffer? > That would be a big nonsense! Tell me a real use case for such kind of request... > What about one-to-many and many-to-one cases? The input system and the logging > facilities could serve as examples where such buffers would be useful. > There is no ne-to-many and many-to-one cases since the API will handle this. You can not read more data then fit in the fifo, also u can not write more data the fifo can handle. Stefani