netdev - Re: [PATCH -next] isdn: capi, Use list_for_each

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: <ZO8PBojBX7trfVnU@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:42:30 +0200
From: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	jirislaby@...nel.org, benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com,
	Karsten Keil <isdn@...ux-pingi.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] isdn: capi, Use list_for_each_entry() helper

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:05:28PM +0800, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
> Convert list_for_each() to list_for_each_entry() so that the l
> list_head pointer and list_entry() call are no longer needed, which
> can reduce a few lines of code. No functional changed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/isdn/capi/capi.c | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/isdn/capi/capi.c b/drivers/isdn/capi/capi.c
> index 2f3789515445..6664eb3dc35c 100644
> --- a/drivers/isdn/capi/capi.c
> +++ b/drivers/isdn/capi/capi.c
> @@ -1326,11 +1326,9 @@ static inline void capinc_tty_exit(void) { }
>  static int __maybe_unused capi20_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  {
>  	struct capidev *cdev;
> -	struct list_head *l;
>  
>  	mutex_lock(&capidev_list_lock);
> -	list_for_each(l, &capidev_list) {
> -		cdev = list_entry(l, struct capidev, list);
> +	list_for_each_entry(cdev, &capidev_list, list) {
>  		seq_printf(m, "0 %d %lu %lu %lu %lu\n",
>  			   cdev->ap.applid,
>  			   cdev->ap.nrecvctlpkt,
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Probably { } aren't needed now.
Reviewed-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>