Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 28 Feb 2022 22:50:06 +0000
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
From:   =?utf-8?Q?Barnab=C3=A1s_P=C5=91cze?= <pobrn@protonmail.com>
Cc:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        =?utf-8?Q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@gmail.com>,
        alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
        linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@vu.nl>,
        amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        samba-technical@lists.samba.org,
        linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
        KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, "Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@vu.nl>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
        kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Arnd Bergman <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
        v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List 
        <linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        dma <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Reply-To: =?utf-8?Q?Barnab=C3=A1s_P=C5=91cze?= <pobrn@protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body as a ptr
Message-ID: <Ax76nlte5gO6McgVlkdlM8SHBdfYoG0hb6pFO3MJ6iEg3VCk3kzPWFQ6HS2uVDB8eeyLSr4ku62pXF-FrsROsQvF_VDAW1I5lXTFZTkkMfk=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <73fa82a20910c06784be2352a655acc59e9942ea.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
References: <20220228110822.491923-1-jakobkoschel@gmail.com> <20220228110822.491923-3-jakobkoschel@gmail.com> <2e4e95d6-f6c9-a188-e1cd-b1eae465562a@amd.com> <CAHk-=wgQps58DPEOe4y5cTh5oE9EdNTWRLXzgMiETc+mFX7jzw@mail.gmail.com> <282f0f8d-f491-26fc-6ae0-604b367a5a1a@amd.com> <b2d20961dbb7533f380827a7fcc313ff849875c1.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <7D0C2A5D-500E-4F38-AD0C-A76E132A390E@kernel.org> <73fa82a20910c06784be2352a655acc59e9942ea.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hi


2022. febru=C3=A1r 28., h=C3=A9tf=C5=91 23:28 keltez=C3=A9ssel, James Botto=
mley =C3=ADrta:
> [...]
> Well, yes, but my objection is more to the size of churn than the
> desire to do loop local.  I'm not even sure loop local is possible,
> because it's always annoyed me that for (int i =3D 0; ...  in C++ defines
> i in the outer scope not the loop scope, which is why I never use it.

It is arguably off-topic to the discussion at hand, but I think you might b=
e
thinking of something else (or maybe it was the case in an ancient version =
of C++)
because that does not appear to be case. If it were,

  for (int i ...) { ... }
  for (int i ...) { ... }

would have to trigger a redeclaration error, but that happens neither in C+=
+ nor in C.
The variable is also inaccessible outside the loop.


> [...]


Regards,
Barnab=C3=A1s P=C5=91cze