Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 12:29:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 12:29:35 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.104]:29843 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 12:29:30 -0400 Importance: Normal Sensitivity: Subject: Re: [PATCH] add safe version of list_for_each_entry() to list.h To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Mark Peloquin" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:40:45 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01ML072/01/M/IBM(Release 5.0.11 |July 29, 2002) at 10/04/2002 12:34:25 PM 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: 949 Lines: 31 On 10/04/2002 at 11:00 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > That behaviour for list_del is new and, IMNSHO, bogus. There's now _zero_ > gain in using list_del instead of list_del_init. The only gain I've noticed is when the container object is memset it gives implicit initialization if one uses list_del. > akpm changed it about > 5 months ago with a comment that says: > "list_head debugging" > so i think it's pretty safe to assume that this behaviour will not > remain into 2.6. if you think you want list_member, use list_del_init > and list_empty() instead. I wasn't aware this was somewhat recently added item for debug and will switch to list_del_init(). Thanks for bring this to my attention! - 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/