All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Jiri Benc <jbenc@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: d80211: clean up some list and loop code
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:25:01 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061116232455.GA3297@tuxdriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1163718270.3392.19.camel@johannes.berg>

On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 12:04:29AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Remove things like "for (;;)" or "for (; condition ;)".
> Ever heard of while loops?

> --- wireless-dev.orig/net/d80211/sta_info.c	2006-11-16 23:40:48.164935990 +0100
> +++ wireless-dev/net/d80211/sta_info.c	2006-11-16 23:55:34.634935990 +0100
> @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static void sta_info_cleanup_expire_buff
>  	if (skb_queue_empty(&sta->ps_tx_buf))
>  		return;
>  
> -	for (;;) {
> +	while (1) {
>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&sta->ps_tx_buf.lock, flags);
>  		skb = skb_peek(&sta->ps_tx_buf);
>  		if (sta_info_buffer_expired(local, sta, skb)) {

FWIW, I think I prefer the "for (;;)" version for endless loops.
It looks more intentional to me.  Some grep'ing showed nearly equal
usage of "for (;;)" versus "while (1)".  Is there any "official"
preference?  I don't see anything in CodingStyle about it.

I agree with the other cleanups.

John
-- 
John W. Linville
linville@tuxdriver.com

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-16 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-16 23:04 d80211: clean up some list and loop code Johannes Berg
2006-11-16 23:25 ` John W. Linville [this message]
2006-11-16 23:37   ` Johannes Berg
2006-11-17  0:00     ` John W. Linville
2006-11-17  0:26       ` John W. Linville
2006-11-17  2:37   ` Dave Dillow
2006-11-16 23:40 ` Jouni Malinen
2006-11-16 23:42   ` Johannes Berg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20061116232455.GA3297@tuxdriver.com \
    --to=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=jbenc@suse.cz \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.