Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:02:27 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0.01/1] hlist_for_each_entry_xxx: kill the "pos" argument |
| |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:23:37PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 04/22, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:09:21 +0400 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote: > > > On 04/21, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > Might it be better to do this in two > > > > phases to allow these patches to be applied incrementally? > > > > > > > > 1. Change all to "obsolete" __hlist_for_each_entry_xxx(). > > > > > > > > 2. Incrementally change to hlist_for_each_entry_xxx(), removing > > > > the extra variable where possible. > > > > > > Yes sure. Actually this was my initial plan. > > > > > > Andrew, which way do you prefer? > > > > Neither ;) > > > > The smoothest transition would come by adding new macros with new names, > > then migrating all callers over then removing the old macros. > > OK, will do, but.... > > > Preferably after leaving the old, unused macros in place for a kernel > > cycle, but there's not much value in that unless we can make them emil > > warnings when used, which isn't completely trivial. > > we can make > > static inline void __deprecated nop_for_hlist_for_each_entry(void) {} > > and insert it into the old macro's body > > > Plus there is no sensible new name which we can use. Maybe you can think > > of one, in which case that'd be a nice way to go. > > Ah. But this _is_ the problem. There is no a good name for hlist_for_each_entry() > except of course hlist_for_each_entry.
hlist_for_every_entry()? (Sorry, couldn't resist...)
Thanx, Paul
> Well. I'll use hnode_for_each_entry_xxx(), but please let me know if you > change your mind ;) > > Oleg. >
| |