Re: [PATCH] Introduce a handy list_first_entry macro
- From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:11:44 -0700
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 03:18:56PM +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
There are many places in the kernel where the construction like
foo = list_entry(head->next, struct foo_struct, list);
are used.
The code might look more descriptive and neat if using the macro
list_first_entry(head, type, member) \
list_entry((head)->next, type, member)
- dquot = list_entry(dirty->next, struct dquot, dq_dirty);
+ dquot = list_first_entry(dirty, struct dquot, dq_dirty);
I think it's more than just descriptive and neat. A common sneaky bug
is to accidentally pass &list->next into list_entry() instead of
list->next. This is easy to do because one is used to typing &list in
list_empty(), etc. So by following ->next in the macro we make the list
argument consistent in list_empty() and list_first_entry() and hopefully
reduce the risk of making that mistake.
I like it.
- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH] Introduce a handy list_first_entry macro
- From: Pavel Emelianov
- [PATCH] Introduce a handy list_first_entry macro
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] documentation: convert the Documentation directory to UTF-8
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] CFS (Completely Fair Scheduler), v2
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce a handy list_first_entry macro
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce a handy list_first_entry macro
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|