linux-kernel - [PATCH RFCv2 5/8] treewide: Use __list_del() instead of __list

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: <1311793825-31933-6-git-send-email-schnhrr@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jul 2011 21:10:22 +0200
From:	Jan H. Schönherr <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jan H. Schönherr <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>
Subject: [PATCH RFCv2 5/8] treewide: Use __list_del() instead of __list_link()

From: Jan H. Schönherr <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>

There are a few cases where __list_link() is actually used
to delete a single list entry like this:

__list_link(entry->prev, entry->next);

For this case, we have the function __list_del() which
does exactly the same, but states the purpose more clearly:

__list_del(entry);

This commit changes these occurrences.

Signed-off-by: Jan H. Schönherr <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>
---
 include/linux/list.h  |    2 +-
 kernel/mutex.h        |    2 +-
 kernel/timer.c        |    2 +-
 net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c |    2 +-
 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
index 5319099..86a5f3f 100644
--- a/include/linux/list.h
+++ b/include/linux/list.h
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ static inline void __list_del(struct list_head *entry)
 
 static inline void list_del(struct list_head *entry)
 {
-	__list_link(entry->prev, entry->next);
+	__list_del(entry);
 	entry->next = LIST_POISON1;
 	entry->prev = LIST_POISON2;
 }
diff --git a/kernel/mutex.h b/kernel/mutex.h
index bcac8d1..39c02e8 100644
--- a/kernel/mutex.h
+++ b/kernel/mutex.h
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 #define spin_unlock_mutex(lock, flags) \
 		do { spin_unlock(lock); (void)(flags); } while (0)
 #define mutex_remove_waiter(lock, waiter, ti) \
-		__list_link((waiter)->list.prev, (waiter)->list.next)
+		__list_del(&(waiter)->list)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 static inline void mutex_set_owner(struct mutex *lock)
diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c
index 7ecae26..867a7ee 100644
--- a/kernel/timer.c
+++ b/kernel/timer.c
@@ -615,7 +615,7 @@ static inline void detach_timer(struct timer_list *timer,
 
 	debug_deactivate(timer);
 
-	__list_link(entry->prev, entry->next);
+	__list_del(entry);
 	if (clear_pending)
 		entry->next = NULL;
 	entry->prev = LIST_POISON2;
diff --git a/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c b/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
index 5803807..552603f 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static int cipso_v4_cache_check(const unsigned char *key,
 			if (entry->activity > prev_entry->activity &&
 			    entry->activity - prev_entry->activity >
 			    CIPSO_V4_CACHE_REORDERLIMIT) {
-				__list_link(entry->list.prev, entry->list.next);
+				__list_del(&entry->list);
 				__list_add(&entry->list,
 					   prev_entry->list.prev,
 					   &prev_entry->list);
-- 
1.7.6

--
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/