linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 36/51] writeback: implement bdi_for_each

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: <20150703170651.GE5273@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Fri, 3 Jul 2015 13:06:51 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
	hannes@...xchg.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	vgoyal@...hat.com, lizefan@...wei.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, mhocko@...e.cz, clm@...com,
	fengguang.wu@...el.com, david@...morbit.com, gthelen@...gle.com,
	khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 36/51] writeback: implement bdi_for_each_wb()

On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 02:26:27PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> That's a good point. Thanks for explanation. Maybe add a comment like:
> /*
>  * We use use this seemingly complicated 'for' loop so that 'break' and
>  * 'continue' continue to work as expected.
>  */

This kinda feel superflous for me.  This is something true for all
iteration wrappers which falls within the area of well-established
convention, I think.  If it's doing something weird like combining
if-else clause to do post-conditional processing, sure, but this is
really kinda standard.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/