Re: [PATCH v10 09/17] rangeset: add rangeset_empty() function

[Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>]

Hi Stewart,

Stewart Hildebrand <stewart.hildebrand@amd.com> writes:

> On 10/12/23 18:09, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
>> This function can be used when user wants to remove all rangeset
>> entries but do not want to destroy rangeset itself.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@epam.com>
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>> Changes in v10:
>> 
>>  - New in v10. The function is used in "vpci/header: handle p2m range sets per BAR"
>> ---
>>  xen/common/rangeset.c      | 9 +++++++--
>>  xen/include/xen/rangeset.h | 3 ++-
>>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/xen/common/rangeset.c b/xen/common/rangeset.c
>> index 35c3420885..420275669e 100644
>> --- a/xen/common/rangeset.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/rangeset.c
>> @@ -448,8 +448,7 @@ struct rangeset *rangeset_new(
>>      return r;
>>  }
>> 
>> -void rangeset_destroy(
>> -    struct rangeset *r)
>> +void rangeset_empty(struct rangeset *r)
>>  {
>>      struct range *x;
>> 
>> @@ -465,6 +464,12 @@ void rangeset_destroy(
>> 
>>      while ( (x = first_range(r)) != NULL )
>>          destroy_range(r, x);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void rangeset_destroy(
>> +    struct rangeset *r)
>> +{
>> +    rangeset_empty(r);
>> 
>>      xfree(r);
>>  }
>
> I think the list_del(&r->rangeset_list) operation (and associated
> locking and NULL check) shouldn't be moved to the new rangeset_empty()
> function, it should stay in rangeset_destroy().

Ahh, yes. It was a really stupid idea to move list_del(&r->rangeset_list); to
rangeset_empty().

-- 
WBR, Volodymyr