Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758945AbXE3VO2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 17:14:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755444AbXE3VOU (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 17:14:20 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.248]:17029 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756033AbXE3VOT (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 17:14:19 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=q6CpNfVbrvywgCIL7Qk3IhUuO6rGYtJjWLOJ9UQtHMBSYChf/lNGMlcLYMGcpu/ENvjyqbZQXGOHHWwPnEoHSRkVSHlg3D0jCxkYImWLLjA+AdPpumbjdpwfIiuW8q13Sh+TPZmRvrNVzM+pSRlbOXx/pHM3NHPqfCDHBiuIndU= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 02:44:17 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" To: "Pete Zaitcev" Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/block/ub.c: use list_for_each_entry() Cc: "Matthias Kaehlcke" , axboe@kernel.dk, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <20070530123840.e54d73c2.zaitcev@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070530084752.GE14284@traven> <20070530123840.e54d73c2.zaitcev@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1400 Lines: 32 Hi Pete, On 5/31/07, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2007 10:47:52 +0200, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > > > @@ -1608,8 +1605,7 @@ static void ub_reset_task(struct work_struct *work) > > spin_lock_irqsave(sc->lock, flags); > > sc->reset = 0; > > tasklet_schedule(&sc->tasklet); > > - list_for_each(p, &sc->luns) { > > - lun = list_entry(p, struct ub_lun, link); > > + list_for_each_entry(lun, &sc->luns, link) { > > blk_start_queue(lun->disk->queue); > > } > > wake_up(&sc->reset_wait); > > This patch straddles the border of acceptable. The pointless obfuscation > is balanced against the removal of explicit type in list_entry() and thus > a possible mismatched struct. I'm not acking nor naking this. A list_for_each() followed by list_entry() ---> list_for_each_entry() conversion is a pretty harmless (and desirable) conversion, IMO. In fact list_for_each_entry() itself uses list_entry(..., typeof(*p), ...) which seems to be a safer way to use list_entry() than specifying the type explicity/manually in its arguments, no? Satyam - 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/