lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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.
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-23 23:05    [W:0.208 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site