Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] list: Prepare entry iterators to cache cursor state

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 10:01:25AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> On 6/10/26 17:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 11:11:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> >> On 6/10/26 10:18, Kaitao Cheng wrote:
> >>> 在 2026/6/10 16:07, Christian König 写道:

...

> >>> Should we revert to v1, or keep list_for_each_entry() and
> >>> list_for_each_entry_safe() as they are, close this thread, and make no
> >>> changes?
> >>>
> >>> Link to v1:
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260529082149.76764-1-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev/
> >>>
> >>> Or do you have any better suggestions?
> >>
> >> v1 looks perfectly reasonable to me.
> > 
> > But why not just hiding that once for all (in case they don't use the temporary
> > iterator)? Easy to automate, robust — everyone is happy?
> 
> As far as I can see that is an extremely bad idea.
> 
> The distinction between the use cases of 'iterating the list' and 'iterating
> the list while you modify it' is completely intentional.

What I meant is to keep the name, just drop the parameter (make it hidden and
being defined inside list_for_each_*_safe() cases).

> See the bool type can be implemented by int as well, but it is just a
> different use case.

> >> You should just include some patches in the same patch set to actually use
> >> the new macros.
> >>
> >> If you modify the files under drivers/dma-buf or drivers/gpu/drm/amd to use
> >> the new macro I'm happy to review that.
> > 
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko