linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/5] ipc/sem: use proper list api for pending

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 04:53:36 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     manfred@...orfullife.com, dave@...olabs.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] ipc/sem: use proper list api for pending_list wakeups

... saves some LoC and looks cleaner than re-implementing the
calls.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
---
 ipc/sem.c | 38 +++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index 3774b21c54d4..64c9d143b300 100644
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -799,8 +799,7 @@ static inline int check_restart(struct sem_array *sma, struct sem_queue *q)
 static int wake_const_ops(struct sem_array *sma, int semnum,
 			  struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
 {
-	struct sem_queue *q;
-	struct list_head *walk;
+	struct sem_queue *q, *tmp;
 	struct list_head *pending_list;
 	int semop_completed = 0;
 
@@ -809,25 +808,19 @@ static int wake_const_ops(struct sem_array *sma, int semnum,
 	else
 		pending_list = &sma->sem_base[semnum].pending_const;
 
-	walk = pending_list->next;
-	while (walk != pending_list) {
-		int error;
-
-		q = container_of(walk, struct sem_queue, list);
-		walk = walk->next;
-
-		error = perform_atomic_semop(sma, q);
-
-		if (error <= 0) {
-			/* operation completed, remove from queue & wakeup */
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(q, tmp, pending_list, list) {
+		int error = perform_atomic_semop(sma, q);
 
-			unlink_queue(sma, q);
+		if (error > 0)
+			continue;
+		/* operation completed, remove from queue & wakeup */
+		unlink_queue(sma, q);
 
-			wake_up_sem_queue_prepare(q, error, wake_q);
-			if (error == 0)
-				semop_completed = 1;
-		}
+		wake_up_sem_queue_prepare(q, error, wake_q);
+		if (error == 0)
+			semop_completed = 1;
 	}
+
 	return semop_completed;
 }
 
@@ -900,8 +893,7 @@ static int do_smart_wakeup_zero(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
  */
 static int update_queue(struct sem_array *sma, int semnum, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
 {
-	struct sem_queue *q;
-	struct list_head *walk;
+	struct sem_queue *q, *tmp;
 	struct list_head *pending_list;
 	int semop_completed = 0;
 
@@ -911,13 +903,9 @@ static int update_queue(struct sem_array *sma, int semnum, struct wake_q_head *w
 		pending_list = &sma->sem_base[semnum].pending_alter;
 
 again:
-	walk = pending_list->next;
-	while (walk != pending_list) {
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(q, tmp, pending_list, list) {
 		int error, restart;
 
-		q = container_of(walk, struct sem_queue, list);
-		walk = walk->next;
-
 		/* If we are scanning the single sop, per-semaphore list of
 		 * one semaphore and that semaphore is 0, then it is not
 		 * necessary to scan further: simple increments
-- 
2.6.6