2024-04-23 21:11:18

by Andy Shevchenko

Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] ALSA: control: Use list_for_each_entry_safe()

Instead of reiterating the list, use list_for_each_entry_safe()
that allows to continue without starting over.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]>
---
v2: added tag (Jaroslav)
sound/core/control_led.c | 9 +++------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/core/control_led.c b/sound/core/control_led.c
index 061a8ea23340..ea95405c76a4 100644
--- a/sound/core/control_led.c
+++ b/sound/core/control_led.c
@@ -290,16 +290,13 @@ static void snd_ctl_led_clean(struct snd_card *card)
{
unsigned int group;
struct snd_ctl_led *led;
- struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl;
+ struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl, *_lctl;

for (group = 0; group < MAX_LED; group++) {
led = &snd_ctl_leds[group];
-repeat:
- list_for_each_entry(lctl, &led->controls, list)
- if (!card || lctl->card == card) {
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(lctl, _lctl, &led->controls, list)
+ if (!card || lctl->card == card)
snd_ctl_led_ctl_destroy(lctl);
- goto repeat;
- }
}
}

--
2.43.0.rc1.1336.g36b5255a03ac

2024-04-24 07:24:59

by Takashi Iwai

Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] ALSA: control: Use list_for_each_entry_safe()

On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 23:10:22 +0200,
Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> Instead of reiterating the list, use list_for_each_entry_safe()
> that allows to continue without starting over.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2: added tag (Jaroslav)

We have a similar repeat in snd_ctl_led_reset().
Wouldn't it be better to catch both?


thanks,

Takashi

> sound/core/control_led.c | 9 +++------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/core/control_led.c b/sound/core/control_led.c
> index 061a8ea23340..ea95405c76a4 100644
> --- a/sound/core/control_led.c
> +++ b/sound/core/control_led.c
> @@ -290,16 +290,13 @@ static void snd_ctl_led_clean(struct snd_card *card)
> {
> unsigned int group;
> struct snd_ctl_led *led;
> - struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl;
> + struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl, *_lctl;
>
> for (group = 0; group < MAX_LED; group++) {
> led = &snd_ctl_leds[group];
> -repeat:
> - list_for_each_entry(lctl, &led->controls, list)
> - if (!card || lctl->card == card) {
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(lctl, _lctl, &led->controls, list)
> + if (!card || lctl->card == card)
> snd_ctl_led_ctl_destroy(lctl);
> - goto repeat;
> - }
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.43.0.rc1.1336.g36b5255a03ac
>

2024-04-24 17:17:39

by Andy Shevchenko

Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] ALSA: control: Use list_for_each_entry_safe()

On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 09:24:49AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 23:10:22 +0200,
> Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > Instead of reiterating the list, use list_for_each_entry_safe()
> > that allows to continue without starting over.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Jaroslav Kysela <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > v2: added tag (Jaroslav)
>
> We have a similar repeat in snd_ctl_led_reset().
> Wouldn't it be better to catch both?

Sure, v3 is on its way.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko