HI Reinette, On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 11:10 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Sai, > > On 3/11/2020 10:45 AM, Sai Praneeth Prakhya wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-03-11 at 08:44 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > > > On 3/10/2020 6:04 PM, Sai Praneeth Prakhya wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 14:59 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > > > > > On 3/6/2020 7:40 PM, Sai Praneeth Prakhya wrote: > > > > > > Currently fill_buf (in-built benchmark) runs as a separate process > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > [SNIP] > > > Maintaining the end pointer is unusual. The start of the buffer and the > > > size are known properties that the end of the buffer can be computed > > > from. Not a problem, it just seems inconsistent that some of the buffer > > > functions operate on the start pointer and size while others operate on > > > the start pointer and end pointer. > > > > Ok.. makes sense. I will try to make it consistent by using endptr all the > > time. One advantage of using endptr is that we could just compute endptr > > once > > and use it when needed by passing it as variable (will try to not make it > > global variable). > > This may add unnecessary complexity because from what I can tell some of > those calls require buffer size and this would then require needing to > recompute the buffer size based on the start and end pointers. Do you > really need the end pointer? Can you not just use the start pointer and > buffer size? Ok.. makes sense. Will use buffer size. Regards, Sai
