[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <533A2144.8040607@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 10:15:32 +0800
From: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
CC: "'???'" <jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com>,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: use list_for_each_entry{_safe} for
simplyfying code
Hi Yu,
On 04/01/2014 09:45 AM, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Gu,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gu Zheng [mailto:guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 6:07 PM
>> To: Chao Yu
>> Cc: ???; linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org;
>> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: use list_for_each_entry{_safe} for simplyfying code
>>
>> Hi Yu,
>> On 03/29/2014 11:33 AM, Chao Yu wrote:
>>
>>> This patch use list_for_each_entry{_safe} instead of list_for_each{_safe} for
>>> simplfying code.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 37 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
>>> fs/f2fs/node.c | 16 ++++++----------
>>> fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 6 ++----
>>> fs/f2fs/segment.c | 6 ++----
>>> 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> index d877f46..4aa521a 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> @@ -308,16 +308,15 @@ void release_orphan_inode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>>>
>>> void add_orphan_inode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t ino)
>>> {
>>> - struct list_head *head, *this;
>>> - struct orphan_inode_entry *new = NULL, *orphan = NULL;
>>> + struct list_head *head;
>>> + struct orphan_inode_entry *new, *orphan;
>>>
>>> new = f2fs_kmem_cache_alloc(orphan_entry_slab, GFP_ATOMIC);
>>> new->ino = ino;
>>>
>>> spin_lock(&sbi->orphan_inode_lock);
>>> head = &sbi->orphan_inode_list;
>>> - list_for_each(this, head) {
>>> - orphan = list_entry(this, struct orphan_inode_entry, list);
>>> + list_for_each_entry(orphan, head, list) {
>>> if (orphan->ino == ino) {
>>> spin_unlock(&sbi->orphan_inode_lock);
>>> kmem_cache_free(orphan_entry_slab, new);
>>> @@ -326,14 +325,10 @@ void add_orphan_inode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t ino)
>>>
>>> if (orphan->ino > ino)
>>> break;
>>> - orphan = NULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - /* add new_oentry into list which is sorted by inode number */
>>> - if (orphan)
>>> - list_add(&new->list, this->prev);
>>> - else
>>> - list_add_tail(&new->list, head);
>>> + /* add new orphan entry into list which is sorted by inode number */
>>> + list_add_tail(&new->list, &orphan->list);
>>
>> It seems that the logic can not be changed here, otherwise the orphan list will not be in order
>> if
>> the new ino is bigger than all the in-list ones.
>> E.g.
>> ino:5
>> 1-->2-->3-->4
>> ==>
>> 1-->2-->3-->5-->4
>
> As I checked, if new ino is bigger than all, it will break from list_for_each_entry because
> &orphan->list is pointing to head. So list_add_tail can add the new entry before head to make
> this list in order.
Oh...Yes, you are right.
Thanks for correcting me.
Regards,
Gu
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gu
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>
--
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