Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:39:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:39:36 -0400 Received: from pD9E23892.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.226.56.146]:13032 "EHLO hawkeye.luckynet.adm") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:39:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:45:35 -0600 (MDT) From: Thunder from the hill X-X-Sender: thunder@hawkeye.luckynet.adm To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH][2.5] Single linked lists for Linux, overly complicated v2 In-Reply-To: <20020926142547.N13817@bitchcake.off.net> Message-ID: X-Location: Dorndorf/Steudnitz; Germany MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 938 Lines: 27 Hi, My point is: We don't know the parent structure. We shouldn't know it, since it takes time. So I try to keep the address pointer stable instead of just exchanging pointers. That's why I'm exchanging pointers, and that's also why slist_del() currently returns a value: because the deleted list entry would otherwise be lost in space... If any applicator needs to know a list header (primer), he shall produce one and pass the first entry after the primer. We should only depend on one single facility: the next field of the handled structure. Also notice that we can restart list_for_each*() from any position. Thunder -- assert(typeof((fool)->next) == typeof(fool)); /* wrong */ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/