linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:53:50 +0200
From:	Arne Jansen <sensille@....net>
To:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
CC:	Chris Mason <clmason@...ionio.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del

On 05.06.2013 04:09, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 4 June 2013 14:44:35 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote:
>>
>> Or while_list_drain?

I'm fine with while_list_drain, although a name starting with list_
like all other list macros would be nice. How about just list_drain?
The next question is where to put it in the header so that anyone
doing list cleanup stumbles upon it. Maybe directly below list_del?

-Arne

> 
> Not sure if the silence is approval or lack of interest, but a new set
> of patches is posted.  By playing around with the implementation a
> bit, I have actually found a variant that makes the object code
> shrink.  Not one variant gave same-size object code.  There's compiler
> optimization for you.
> 
> Jörn
> 
> --
> Money can buy bandwidth, but latency is forever.
> -- John R. Mashey

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/