[RFC] microoptimizing hlist_add_{before,behind}

[Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>]

	Neither hlist_add_before() nor hlist_add_behind() should ever
be called with both arguments pointing to the same hlist_node.
However, gcc doesn't know that, so it ends up with pointless reloads.
AFAICS, the following generates better code, is obviously equivalent
in case when arguments are different and actually even in case when
they are same, the end result is identical (if the hlist hadn't been
corrupted even earlier than that).

	Objections?

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
---
diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
index 85c92555e31f..aee8232e6827 100644
--- a/include/linux/list.h
+++ b/include/linux/list.h
@@ -793,21 +793,21 @@ static inline void hlist_add_head(struct hlist_node *n, struct hlist_head *h)
 static inline void hlist_add_before(struct hlist_node *n,
 					struct hlist_node *next)
 {
-	n->pprev = next->pprev;
+	struct hlist_node *p = n->pprev = next->pprev;
 	n->next = next;
 	next->pprev = &n->next;
-	WRITE_ONCE(*(n->pprev), n);
+	WRITE_ONCE(*p, n);
 }
 
 static inline void hlist_add_behind(struct hlist_node *n,
 				    struct hlist_node *prev)
 {
-	n->next = prev->next;
+	struct hlist_node *p = n->next = prev->next;
 	prev->next = n;
 	n->pprev = &prev->next;
 
-	if (n->next)
-		n->next->pprev  = &n->next;
+	if (p)
+		p->pprev  = &n->next;
 }
 
 /* after that we'll appear to be on some hlist and hlist_del will work */