[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101016075521.GJ19147@amd>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 18:55:21 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] kernel: add bl_list
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:52:08PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 22:18:33 +1000 Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
> >
> > Introduce a type of hlist that can support the use of the lowest bit
> > in the hlist_head. This will be subsequently used to implement
> > per-bucket bit spinlock for inode hashes.
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> > +static inline void INIT_HLIST_BL_NODE(struct hlist_bl_node *h)
> > +{
> > + h->next = NULL;
> > + h->pprev = NULL;
> > +}
>
> No need to shout.
Just following the rest of the lists.
> > ...
> >
> > +static inline void hlist_bl_del(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> > +{
> > + __hlist_bl_del(n);
> > + n->next = LIST_POISON1;
> > + n->pprev = LIST_POISON2;
> > +}
>
> I'd suggest creating new poison values for hlist_bl's, leave
> LIST_POISON1 and LIST_POISON2 for list_head (and any other list
> variants which went and used them :()
I guess they're used for lists, hlists, nulls lists. Would it really
help much seeing as you have so many lists anyway? I guess we could
do an incremental patch but I'll postpone it for now.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists