Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757200Ab2JQOYD (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2012 10:24:03 -0400 Received: from mail-ia0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:64753 "EHLO mail-ia0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756274Ab2JQOYB (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2012 10:24:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1350387889-15324-4-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> References: <1350387889-15324-1-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> <1350387889-15324-4-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:54:00 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Thermal: fix empty list checking method. From: Viresh Kumar To: "hongbo.zhang" Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, STEricsson_nomadik_linux@list.st.com, kernel@igloocommunity.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, "hongbo.zhang" , patches@linaro.org 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: 1522 Lines: 37 On 16 October 2012 17:14, hongbo.zhang wrote: > From: "hongbo.zhang" > > Is is not reliable to check the list entry pointer after > list_for_each_entry loop, list_empty should be used instead. > > Signed-off-by: hongbo.zhang > --- > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > index b6b4c2a..d196230 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > @@ -247,12 +247,13 @@ static int cpufreq_get_max_state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev, > struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table; > > mutex_lock(&cooling_cpufreq_lock); > + if (list_empty(&cooling_cpufreq_list)) > + goto return_get_max_state; > + > list_for_each_entry(cpufreq_device, &cooling_cpufreq_list, node) { > if (cpufreq_device && cpufreq_device->cool_dev == cdev) > break; > } > - if (cpufreq_device == NULL) > - goto return_get_max_state; I am surprised, why is it written like this in the first place :) Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar -- 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/