2014-11-06 10:20:46

by Axel Lin

Subject: [PATCH] NFC: llcp: Use list_for_each_entry in llcp_accept_poll

list_for_each_entry_safe() is necessary if list objects are deleted from
the list while traversing it. Not the case here, so we can use the base
list_for_each_entry variant.

Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
---
net/nfc/llcp_sock.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/nfc/llcp_sock.c b/net/nfc/llcp_sock.c
index 83bc785..e181e29 100644
--- a/net/nfc/llcp_sock.c
+++ b/net/nfc/llcp_sock.c
@@ -524,13 +524,13 @@ static int llcp_sock_getname(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *uaddr,

static inline unsigned int llcp_accept_poll(struct sock *parent)
{
- struct nfc_llcp_sock *llcp_sock, *n, *parent_sock;
+ struct nfc_llcp_sock *llcp_sock, *parent_sock;
struct sock *sk;

parent_sock = nfc_llcp_sock(parent);

- list_for_each_entry_safe(llcp_sock, n, &parent_sock->accept_queue,
- accept_queue) {
+ list_for_each_entry(llcp_sock, &parent_sock->accept_queue,
+ accept_queue) {
sk = &llcp_sock->sk;

if (sk->sk_state == LLCP_CONNECTED)
--
1.9.1

2014-11-28 12:42:31

by Samuel Ortiz

Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFC: llcp: Use list_for_each_entry in llcp_accept_poll

Hi Axel,

On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 06:20:41PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> list_for_each_entry_safe() is necessary if list objects are deleted from
> the list while traversing it. Not the case here, so we can use the base
> list_for_each_entry variant.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
> ---
> net/nfc/llcp_sock.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Applied to nfc-next, thanks.

Cheers,
Samuel.