Re: [PATCH 3/9] sunrpc/cache: use list_del_init for the list_head entries in cache_deferred_req

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 04:32:54PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> Using list_del_init is generally safer than list_del, and it will
> allow us, in a subsequent patch, to see if an entry has already been
> processed or not.

Also applied this (and the previous)--thanks.--b.

> 
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> ---
> 
>  net/sunrpc/cache.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> index baddb23..9c8f0cc 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> @@ -529,8 +529,8 @@ static int cache_defer_req(struct cache_req *req, struct cache_head *item)
>  	if (++cache_defer_cnt > DFR_MAX) {
>  		dreq = list_entry(cache_defer_list.prev,
>  				  struct cache_deferred_req, recent);
> -		list_del(&dreq->recent);
> -		list_del(&dreq->hash);
> +		list_del_init(&dreq->recent);
> +		list_del_init(&dreq->hash);
>  		cache_defer_cnt--;
>  	}
>  	spin_unlock(&cache_defer_lock);
> @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ static void cache_revisit_request(struct cache_head *item)
>  			dreq = list_entry(lp, struct cache_deferred_req, hash);
>  			lp = lp->next;
>  			if (dreq->item == item) {
> -				list_del(&dreq->hash);
> +				list_del_init(&dreq->hash);
>  				list_move(&dreq->recent, &pending);
>  				cache_defer_cnt--;
>  			}
> @@ -590,7 +590,7 @@ void cache_clean_deferred(void *owner)
>  
>  	list_for_each_entry_safe(dreq, tmp, &cache_defer_list, recent) {
>  		if (dreq->owner == owner) {
> -			list_del(&dreq->hash);
> +			list_del_init(&dreq->hash);
>  			list_move(&dreq->recent, &pending);
>  			cache_defer_cnt--;
>  		}
> 
>