linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0.01/1] hlist_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]

Message-ID: <20080422162337.GB19909@tv-sign.ru>
Date:	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:23:37 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, hch@....de, davem@...emloft.net,
	peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0.01/1] hlist_for_each_entry_xxx: kill the "pos" argument

On 04/22, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:09:21 +0400 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> wrote:
> > On 04/21, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > Might it be better to do this in two
> > > phases to allow these patches to be applied incrementally?
> > >
> > > 1.	Change all to "obsolete" __hlist_for_each_entry_xxx().
> > >
> > > 2.	Incrementally change to hlist_for_each_entry_xxx(), removing
> > > 	the extra variable where possible.
> >
> > Yes sure. Actually this was my initial plan.
> >
> > Andrew, which way do you prefer?
>
> Neither ;)
>
> The smoothest transition would come by adding new macros with new names,
> then migrating all callers over then removing the old macros.

OK, will do, but....

> Preferably after leaving the old, unused macros in place for a kernel
> cycle, but there's not much value in that unless we can make them emil
> warnings when used, which isn't completely trivial.

we can make

	static inline void __deprecated nop_for_hlist_for_each_entry(void) {}

and insert it into the old macro's body

> Plus there is no sensible new name which we can use.  Maybe you can think
> of one, in which case that'd be a nice way to go.

Ah. But this _is_ the problem. There is no a good name for hlist_for_each_entry()
except of course hlist_for_each_entry.

Well. I'll use hnode_for_each_entry_xxx(), but please let me know if you
change your mind ;)

Oleg.

--
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/