From: Chris Mason <clmason@fusionio.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, J??rn Engel <joern@logfs.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 10:53:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604145322.4088.78915@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130604144856.GA12302@infradead.org>
Quoting Christoph Hellwig (2013-06-04 10:48:56)
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 03:55:55PM -0400, J??rn Engel wrote:
> > Actually, when I compare the two invocations, I prefer the
> > list_for_each_entry_del() variant over list_pop_entry().
> >
> > while ((ref = list_pop_entry(&prefs, struct __prelim_ref, list))) {
> > list_for_each_entry_del(ref, &prefs, list) {
> >
> > Christoph?
>
> I really don't like something that looks like an iterator (*for_each*)
> to modify a list. Maybe it's just me, so I'd love to hear others chime
> in.
Have to agree with Christoph. I just couldn't put my finger on why I
didn't like it until I saw the list_pop_entry suggestion.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-04 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-03 17:28 [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del Joern Engel
2013-06-03 17:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] list: add list_for_each_entry_del Joern Engel
2013-06-06 19:32 ` Andy Shevchenko
2013-06-06 18:12 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-06 19:49 ` Andy Shevchenko
2013-06-07 16:36 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-07 18:30 ` Andy Shevchenko
2013-06-07 18:48 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-08 0:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
2013-06-03 17:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_del Joern Engel
2013-06-03 18:07 ` [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del Jörn Engel
2013-06-03 20:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-06-03 19:36 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-03 19:55 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-04 14:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-06-04 14:53 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2013-06-04 20:09 ` Arne Jansen
2013-06-04 18:44 ` Jörn Engel
2013-06-05 2:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] list: add while_list_drain_entry Jörn Engel
2013-06-05 14:32 ` David Sterba
2013-06-05 2:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: use while_list_drain_entry Jörn Engel
2013-06-05 2:09 ` [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del Jörn Engel
2013-06-05 6:53 ` Arne Jansen
2013-06-05 14:25 ` David Sterba
2013-07-05 20:41 ` Jörn Engel
2013-07-05 20:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] list: add list_del_each_entry Jörn Engel
2013-07-05 22:38 ` Filipe David Manana
2013-07-15 17:35 ` Jörn Engel
2013-07-05 20:41 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: use list_del_each_entry Jörn Engel
2013-07-08 4:37 ` [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del Dave Chinner
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=20130604145322.4088.78915@localhost.localdomain \
--to=clmason@fusionio.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=joern@logfs.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).