linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] ALSA: control: Use list_for_each_entry

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: <87ttsit08x.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date:   Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:02:38 +0200
From:   Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] ALSA: control: Use list_for_each_entry_safe()

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 15:52:52 +0200,
Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
> Instead of reiterating the list, use list_for_each_entry_safe()
> that allows to continue without starting over.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>

Through a quick glance, it should be OK, but I need to read and
understand whether this change is perfectly safe or not -- unless
Jaroslav gives his review and ack.

> ---
> 
> Takashi, if you have anybody or want yourself to spend some time,
> I believe you can simplify a lot the parser in this file with
> the help of lib/cmdline.c APIs.

Thanks for the hint.  Yeah, it looks feasible, but too late for 6.6,
it's a nice TODO ;)


Takashi

> 
>  sound/core/control_led.c | 15 +++++----------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/core/control_led.c b/sound/core/control_led.c
> index a78eb48927c7..afc9ffc388e3 100644
> --- a/sound/core/control_led.c
> +++ b/sound/core/control_led.c
> @@ -297,16 +297,13 @@ static void snd_ctl_led_clean(struct snd_card *card)
>  {
>  	unsigned int group;
>  	struct snd_ctl_led *led;
> -	struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl;
> +	struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl, _lctl;
>  
>  	for (group = 0; group < MAX_LED; group++) {
>  		led = &snd_ctl_leds[group];
> -repeat:
> -		list_for_each_entry(lctl, &led->controls, list)
> -			if (!card || lctl->card == card) {
> +		list_for_each_entry_safe(lctl, _lctl, &led->controls, list)
> +			if (!card || lctl->card == card)
>  				snd_ctl_led_ctl_destroy(lctl);
> -				goto repeat;
> -			}
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -314,7 +311,7 @@ static int snd_ctl_led_reset(int card_number, unsigned int group)
>  {
>  	struct snd_card *card;
>  	struct snd_ctl_led *led;
> -	struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl;
> +	struct snd_ctl_led_ctl *lctl, _lctl;
>  	struct snd_kcontrol_volatile *vd;
>  	bool change = false;
>  
> @@ -329,14 +326,12 @@ static int snd_ctl_led_reset(int card_number, unsigned int group)
>  		return -ENXIO;
>  	}
>  	led = &snd_ctl_leds[group];
> -repeat:
> -	list_for_each_entry(lctl, &led->controls, list)
> +	list_for_each_entry(lctl, _lctl, &led->controls, list)
>  		if (lctl->card == card) {
>  			vd = &lctl->kctl->vd[lctl->index_offset];
>  			vd->access &= ~group_to_access(group);
>  			snd_ctl_led_ctl_destroy(lctl);
>  			change = true;
> -			goto repeat;
>  		}
>  	mutex_unlock(&snd_ctl_led_mutex);
>  	if (change)
> -- 
> 2.40.0.1.gaa8946217a0b
>