[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180731094616.6d70c130@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 09:46:16 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com,
ying.huang@...el.com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
len.brown@...el.com, glider@...gle.com, peter@...leysoftware.com,
aik@...abs.ru
Subject: Re: [QUESTION] llist: Comment releasing 'must delete' restriction
before traversing
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 18:38:09 +0900
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:52:57AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:58:36AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > In restrictive cases like only addtions happen but never deletion, can't
> > > we safely traverse a llist? I believe llist can be more useful if we can
> > > release the restriction. Can't we?
> >
> > Yes you can, but I'm not sure it makes much sense to confuse the
> > comments with this.
> >
> > This really ends up in the 'you had better know what you're doing'
> > category.
>
> Partially agree with you. But why not add more explanation?
>
> If you think the comment confuse us, then it's ok to keep it itself.
>
It appears that you will only have your own users that will be doing
this, correct? How many use cases have no deletion? I wouldn't change
the generic comments on llist for something that's a one off and hardly
used.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists