Thread (53 messages) 53 messages, 12 authors, 2019-12-08

Re: [RFC PATCH 04/10] pipe: Use head and tail pointers for the ring, not cursor and length [ver #2]

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2019-10-27 14:04:06
Also in: keyrings, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-security-module, linux-usb, lkml

This still has signs of that earlier series:

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 4:17 PM David Howells [off-list ref] wrote:
                if (rem >= ibuf->len) {
                        *obuf = *ibuf;
                        ibuf->ops = NULL;
-                       pipe->curbuf = (pipe->curbuf + 1) & (pipe->buffers - 1);
-                       pipe->nrbufs--;
+                       tail++;
+                       pipe_commit_read(pipe, tail);
                } else {
                        if (!pipe_buf_get(pipe, ibuf))
                                goto out_free;
with those odd "pipe_commit_read/write()" helpers.

They make no sense, and they don't make things more legible.

It's shorter and more obvious to just write

   pipe->head = head;

than it is to write

   pipe_commit_write(pipe, head);

Even when the addition of the notifications,  it's all under the
pipe->wait.lock, so it's all just regular assignments.

Now, if at some point it starts doing fancy lockless things, at _that_
point the updates might become more complex, but that's a potential
future thing that wouldn't be relevant for a while, and isn't a reason
to make the code more obscure now.

Hmm?

             Linus
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help