linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/12] writeback: Use the folio

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: <ZJpknTpAoEEaIro0@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 21:25:01 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] writeback: Use the folio_batch queue iterator

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 06:35:15PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> Instead of keeping our own local iterator variable, use the one just
> added to folio_batch.

Ok, that's a slightly different twist to what I just suggested.

>  	for (;;) {
> -		struct folio *folio;
> +		struct folio *folio = writeback_get_next(mapping, wbc);
>  
> +		if (!folio)
>  			break;

But as a purely cosmetic nit I still think this would read nicer as:

	while ((folio = writeback_get_next(mapping, wbc))) {