Thank you Dave for clarifying. I took a look at pcq(9), which I feel is good. I will get to work on implementing a list based atomic FIFO/LIFO mechanism. I will contact you for more questions.
-Randy On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:12 AM, David Young <dyo...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:04:09AM -0800, Randy White wrote: > > I love NetBSD, and I would like to contribute. I see the open job for > lockless queues, and stacks. I want to learn, and I want to help. I have > literature on UNIX kernel development. I have many systems and I think I > could fund myself for the most part. I am familiar with lockless > programming. > > > > I am looking forward to working on netbsd and help maintaining its > awesomeness. > > Randy, > > That's great. Let me know how I can help you to get started. It sounds > like you're already familiar with NetBSD, how and where we communicate, > etc. > > BTW, we have a lockless queue in NetBSD called pcq(9). People will > disagree whether it is the best/only lockless queue for the purpose of, > say, SMP networking. pcq(9) uses a fixed-size ring buffer, which may be > advantageous in some scenarios and a liability in others. > > We are notably lacking a fast *linked* FIFO queue---i.e., one that can > take the place of struct ifqueue/IF_ENQUEUE()/IF_DEQUEUE() for mbuf > queues. > > Dave > > -- > David Young > dyo...@pobox.com Urbana, IL (217) 721-9981 > -- Randy White *Team Lead,Massively Parallel Computing Group* *The Center for Research and Education on Aging* *Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories - The University of California Berkeley*
