From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6309D7F91 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:39:16 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551D78F8052 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:39:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id QExVKkfPJIKXTIox for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:39:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 17:39:57 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] gfs2: simplify current_tail() via list_last_entry_or_null() Message-ID: <20131115163957.GA28467@redhat.com> References: <5285A3F4.4040000@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5285A3F4.4040000@oracle.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jeff Liu Cc: jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, jiri@resnulli.us, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "xfs@oss.sgi.com" , cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org On 11/15, Jeff Liu wrote: > > @@ -441,13 +441,9 @@ static unsigned int current_tail(struct gfs2_sbd *sdp) > > spin_lock(&sdp->sd_ail_lock); > > - if (list_empty(&sdp->sd_ail1_list)) { > - tail = sdp->sd_log_head; > - } else { > - tr = list_entry(sdp->sd_ail1_list.prev, struct gfs2_trans, > - tr_list); > - tail = tr->tr_first; > - } > + tr = list_last_entry_or_null(&sdp->sd_ail1_list, struct gfs2_trans, > + tr_list); > + tail = tr ? tr->tr_first : sdp->sd_log_head; > Personally I agree with Steven. At least in this case list_last_entry_or_null() doesn't really help to simplify the code. But probably list_last_entry() makes sense in the "else" branch, athough this is minor. Off-topic. Not sure this really makes sense, but I was thinking about list_get_first(pos, head, member) \ ((pos) = list_first_entry(head, typeof(*pos), member)) and list_get_first() last of course. The obvious advantage is that compared to tr = list_last_entry(sdp->sd_ail1_list, struct gfs2_trans, tr_list); above you do not need to type "struct gfs2_trans", list_get_last(tr, sdp->sd_ail1_list, tr_list); looks a bit better. Oleg. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs