From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Byungchul Park Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] bcache: Don't reinvent the wheel but use existing llist API Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:42:42 +0900 Message-ID: <20170809064242.GT20323@X58A-UD3R> References: <1502095121-14337-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com> <20170808041233.GR20323@X58A-UD3R> <20170808060056.GS20323@X58A-UD3R> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from LGEAMRELO11.lge.com ([156.147.23.51]:58561 "EHLO lgeamrelo11.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752499AbdHIGn4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2017 02:43:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-bcache-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org To: Nikolay Borisov Cc: Coly Li , kent.overstreet@gmail.com, shli@kernel.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@lge.com On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:39:09AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 8.08.2017 09:00, Byungchul Park wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 01:28:39PM +0800, Coly Li wrote: > >>>>> + llist_for_each_entry_safe(cl, t, reverse, list) { > >>>> > >>>> Just wondering why not using llist_for_each_entry(), or you use the > >>>> _safe version on purpose ? > >>> > >>> If I use llist_for_each_entry(), then it would change the original > >>> behavior. Is it ok? > > Generally, _safe versions of list primitives is used when you are going > to perform removal in the iteration. I haven't looked at the code in > bcache but if it's removing entries from the list then _safe version is > required. If you are only iterating - then non-safe version is fine. Thank you~ :)