On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 12:54:48PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > lwq is a FIFO single-linked queue that only requires a spinlock
> > for dequeueing, which happens in process context. Enqueueing is atomic
> > with no spinlock and can happen in any context.
> >
> > Include a unit test for basic functionality - runs at boot time. Does
> > not use kunit framework.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/lwq.h | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > lib/Kconfig | 5 ++
> > lib/Makefile | 2 +-
> > lib/lwq.c | 149 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 4 files changed, 275 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 include/linux/lwq.h
> > create mode 100644 lib/lwq.c
>
> I've applied and/or squashed the previous four and pushed.
Thanks.
>
> I don't have any specific complaints on this one, but checkpatch
> throws about 20 warnings. Some of those you might want to deal with
> or just ignore. Up to you, but I'll hold off on applying it until I
> hear from you.
There are 5 "Avoid logging continuation" warnings that I cannot avoid.
11 "Prefer FOO_{cont,info}(..) to printk" warnings that I don't think
are relevant. There is no "FOO" that is appropriate, and other testing
code just uses printk.
There is one "added file - does MAINTAINERS need updating?" warning.
I don't know that we need a MAINTAINER for each little lib file (??)
There is one "write a better help paragraph" warning, but I cannot
think of anything useful to add,
And 2 "memory barrier without comment" warnings where there *is* a
comment, but it is one line to far away.
So I don't want to fix any of those warnings. - thanks.
>
> Also, I'm trying to collect a set of potential reviewers for it:
>
> [cel@bazille even-releases]$ scripts/get_maintainer.pl lib/
> Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:206/523=39%)
> "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@xxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:89/523=17%,authored:61/523=12%)
> Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:48/523=9%)
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:48/523=9%)
> David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:43/523=8%)
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list)
> [cel@bazille even-releases]$
>
> Is that a reasonable set to add as Cc's?
It would be hard to do better. I had a look at history and it is mostly
drive-by stuff. A few have been funnelled through Andrew Morton because
he is willing to take most things that don't have any other home.
I doubt we'll get good review - but I've been surprised before.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
