Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] lib/htree: Add locking interface to new Hash Tree

[JaeJoon Jung]

Dear, Greg Kroah-Hartman
Thank you for your reply email.

My first email(PATCH v1) is at the below link:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#label/htree/FMfcgzQVxtmfRqXCVrDZjsJBdddbPLCV
[PATCH v1 1/2] lib/htree: Implementation of new Hash Tree

I missed you in the first email above.
Since I've been working on something called a new Hash Table, it may
not be needed in the kernel right now.
Since it is not currently implemented in the kernel, I have been
thinking a lot about how to release it.
I sent it as a patch file, but since there was too much content,
So, I attached the github address and PDF separately.
I'm very sorry if this doesn't meet the current patch standards.
However, I would like you to check the contents of my first email and
reply to me regarding the technical details.
I want to prove that my Hash Tree is superior.
I know you're busy, but please review it again.
Thanks.
>From JaeJoon Jung.

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 at 16:07, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 07:01:09PM +0900, JaeJoon Jung wrote:
> > Implementation of new Hash Tree [PATCH v2]
> > ------------------------------------------
> > Add spinlock.h and rcupdate.h in the include/linux/htree.h
> > Add htree_root structue to interface locking.
> > htree_root.ht_lock is spinlock_t to run spin_lock.
> > htree_root.ht_first is __rcu type to access rcu API.
> > Access the kernel standard API using macros.
>
> Why?  What is going to use this?  What needs it?
>
> > full source:
> > ------------
> > https://github.com/kernel-bz/htree.git
> >
> > Manual(PDF):
> > ------------
> > https://github.com/kernel-bz/htree/blob/main/docs/htree-20240802.pdf
>
> These obviously do not belong in a changelog text :(