Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758297Ab3FMCjS (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:39:18 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f43.google.com ([209.85.160.43]:41230 "EHLO mail-pb0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756833Ab3FMCjR (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:39:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51B93038.9010202@huawei.com> References: <1371070996-20613-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1371070996-20613-5-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <51B93038.9010202@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:39:16 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AFgN4mWeAVbgF2-NPIcvt526Tik Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] cgroup: use kzalloc() and list_del_init() From: Tejun Heo To: Li Zefan Cc: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, Cgroups , Kent Overstreet , lkml , Christoph Lameter Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 582 Lines: 19 Hello, On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Li Zefan wrote: > Do you mean we prefer list_del_init() than list_del() in general? Then Yes. > in which cases do we prefer list_del()? Nowadays, I don't think we ever prefer list_del(). Maybe if it can be shown that the extra init part is noticeably expensive? -- tejun -- 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/