linux-kernel - Re:Re: [PATCH] sched/rt.c: use list_is_singular() instead of '->prev != ->next'

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7d001f9c.1225.17567cfb5f0.Coremail.sh_def@163.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:07:47 +0800 (CST)
From:   苏辉 <sh_def@....com>
To:     "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH] sched/rt.c: use list_is_singular() instead of
 '->prev != ->next'

>Perhaps there should be a list_has_more_than_one() API, as list_is_singular
>requires two checks, and the "more_than_one" only requires a single check.
>
>list_is_singular() is:
>
>		return !list_empty(list) && (list->next == list->prev);
>
>
>which is more work than what you are replacing.
>

Hi, Steve:

Thanks for your explanation.
Maybe we should add another api called "list_more_than_one" just without
list_empty() check.

I will send PATCH V2 later.

Thank.