netdev - Re: [PATCH] taprio: replace usage of found with dedicated list iterator variable

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]

Message-Id: <A19238DC-24F8-4BD9-A6FA-C8019596F4A6@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Mar 2022 11:26:36 +0200
From:   Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
To:     Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Cc:     Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
        Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
        "Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] taprio: replace usage of found with dedicated list
 iterator variable



> On 31. Mar 2022, at 01:15, Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com> writes:
> 
>> To move the list iterator variable into the list_for_each_entry_*()
>> macro in the future it should be avoided to use the list iterator
>> variable after the loop body.
>> 
>> To *never* use the list iterator variable after the loop it was
>> concluded to use a separate iterator variable instead of a
>> found boolean [1].
>> 
>> This removes the need to use a found variable and simply checking if
>> the variable was set, can determine if the break/goto was hit.
>> 
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wgRr_D8CB-D9Kg-c=EHreAsk5SqXPwr9Y7k9sA6cWXJ6w@mail.gmail.com/
>> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
>> ---
> 
> Code wise, patch look good.
> 
> Just some commit style/meta comments:
> - I think that it would make more sense that these were two separate
> patches, but I haven't been following the fallout of the discussion
> above to know what other folks are doing;

Thanks for the input, I'll split them up.

> - Please use '[PATCH net-next]' in the subject prefix of your patch(es)
> when you next propose this (net-next is closed for new submissions for
> now, it should open again in a few days);

I'll include that prefix, thanks.

Paolo Abeni [CC'd] suggested to bundle all net-next patches in one series [1].
If that's the general desire I'm happy to do that.


[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/7393b673c626fd75f2b4f8509faa5459254fb87c.camel@redhat.com/

> 
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Vinicius