From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Sutter Subject: Re: [nft PATCH 2/4] list: Introduce list_last_entry Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 21:15:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20170712191505.GF16375@orbyte.nwl.cc> References: <20170712123658.25363-1-phil@nwl.cc> <20170712123658.25363-3-phil@nwl.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso , Netfilter Development Mailing list To: Arturo Borrero Gonzalez Return-path: Received: from orbyte.nwl.cc ([151.80.46.58]:52627 "EHLO mail.nwl.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752450AbdGLTPH (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:15:07 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 05:41:32PM +0200, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote: > On 12 July 2017 at 14:36, Phil Sutter wrote: > > Similar to list_first_entry, this macro allows to retrieve the list's > > last entry. > > > > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter > > --- > > include/list.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > Phil, > > I think you can safely merge this patch into 1/4. > > Better to introduce new functions at the same time of the callers, the > same patch. Well, patches 2 and 3 are used by patch 4, so not added afterwards (that would be a bummer indeed). I kept them separate for a purpose: When backporting fixes, it is often quite annoying when one has to fiddle these independent parts out of another patch which does something unrelated. So whenever One wants to backport a patch using list_first_entry() (in this example), there is a separate commit to backport which contains the macro and nothing else. No big deal in this case, though so no objections merging them. Thanks, Phil