simple_ring_buffer_init(9)

πŸ“¦ version 7.3.1, in nixpkgs unstable

πŸ’… simple_ring_buffer_init(9) πŸ’…

okay so this is from the Kernel API Manual, bestie, and it's literally about spinning up a per-CPU ring buffer from a descriptor. buckle up, it's a short one but it's important πŸŽ€


✨ NAME ✨

simple_ring_buffer_init β€” Init @cpu_buffer based on @desc πŸ¦‹

🌸 SYNOPSIS 🌸

int simple_ring_buffer_init (struct simple_rb_per_cpu *cpu_buffer ,
struct simple_buffer_page *bpages , const struct ring_buffer_desc *desc
);

πŸ’– ARGUMENTS πŸ’–

  • cpu_buffer β€” a simple_rb_per_cpu buffer that you're gonna init. and like, you allocated it, not us. caller's job, no cap 🫢
  • bpages β€” an array of simple_buffer_pages, and it needs to have exactly as many elements as desc->nr_page_va. not one less, not one more, okay?? count them πŸ’€
  • desc β€” a ring_buffer_desc. that's the blueprint, the whole vibe, the main character ✨

πŸ‘‘ DESCRIPTION πŸ‘‘

Returns 0 on success, or -EINVAL if the content of desc is invalid. that's it, that's the whole thing. short and iconic πŸ’…

lowkey the vibe check here is entirely on desc β€” if it's cooked, you get -EINVAL. no other outcome, periodt πŸ”₯

🌈 SEE ALSO 🌈

go read all of those too, they're all in their flop era without each other fr fr πŸ§šβ€β™€οΈ


and that's the page, bestie!! πŸ“ this one came out of ./kernel/trace, dated October 2026 β€” so go forth and init your buffers responsibly, mwah πŸ’œβ­

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from