linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators

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:	Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:41:25 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Cc:	Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@...il.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators

On Wed, 2013-01-30 at 21:00 -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> I'm not sure why, but the hlist for each entry iterators were conceived
> differently from the list ones. While the list ones are nice and elegant:
> 
>         list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member)
> 
> The hlist ones were greedy and wanted an extra parameter:
> 
>         hlist_for_each_entry(tpos, pos, head, member)
> 
> Why did they need an extra pos parameter? I'm not quite sure. Not only
> they don't really need it, it also prevents the iterator from looking
> exactly like the list iterator, which is unfortunate.
> 
> Besides the semantic patch, there was some manual work required:
> 
>  - Fix up the actual hlist iterators in linux/list.h
>  - Fix up the declaration of other iterators based on the hlist ones.
>  - A very small amount of places were using the 'node' parameter, this
>  was modified to use 'obj->member' instead.
>  - Coccinelle didn't handle the hlist_for_each_entry_safe iterator
>  properly, so those had to be fixed up manually.

This patch seems to have become commit
b67bfe0d42cac56c512dd5da4b1b347a23f4b70a in v3.9-rc1. It triggers this
(obviously correct) warning:
    net/9p/trans_virtio.c:350:1: warning: ‘p9_virtio_zc_request’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]

> diff --git a/net/9p/trans_virtio.c b/net/9p/trans_virtio.c
> index fd05c81..d7a3fe3 100644
> --- a/net/9p/trans_virtio.c
> +++ b/net/9p/trans_virtio.c
> @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static struct p9_trans_module p9_virtio_trans = {
>  	.create = p9_virtio_create,
>  	.close = p9_virtio_close,
>  	.request = p9_virtio_request,
> -	.zc_request = p9_virtio_zc_request,
> +	//.zc_request = p9_virtio_zc_request,
>  	.cancel = p9_virtio_cancel,
>  	/*
>  	 * We leave one entry for input and one entry for response

Why was that line commented out? There's no comment nor is there
anything in the commit explanation on this change.


Paul Bolle

--
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/