Re: idr_get_new_exact ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



 > Occasionally, drivers care about the value that idr associates with
 > their pointers.
 > 
 > Today we have idr_get_new_above() which allocates a new idr entry
 > above or equal to a given starting id, but sometimes drivers need to
 > force an exact value.
 > 
 > To overcome this small API gap, drivers are wrapping idr_get_new_above
 > and then either BUG_ON() or just call idr_remove() and returns -EBUSY
 > when idr allocates them an id which is different than their requested
 > value.

Looks fine to me as an improvement over the status quo, but I wonder how
many of these places could use the radix_tree stuff instead?  If you're
not using the ability of the idr code to assign an id for you, then it
seems the radix_tree API is a better fit.

 - R.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux