RE: [PATCH] llist: Put parentheses around parameters of llist_for_each_entry_safe()

[ëëì/ìììêì/SW Platform(ì)AOTí(byungchul.park@lge.com)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Huang, Ying [mailto:ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 5:14 PM
> To: ëëì/ìììêì/SW Platform(ì)AOTí(byungchul.park@xxxxxxx)
> Cc: Huang, Ying; peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel-team@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] llist: Put parentheses around parameters of
> llist_for_each_entry_safe()
> 
> "ëëì/ìììêì/SW Platform(ì)AOTí(byungchul.park@xxxxxxx)"
> <byungchul.park@xxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Huang, Ying [mailto:ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:02 PM
> >> To: Byungchul Park
> >> Cc: peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> kernel-team@xxxxxxx; ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] llist: Put parentheses around parameters of
> >> llist_for_each_entry_safe()
> >>
> >> Hi, Byungchul,
> >>
> >> Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >>
> >> > It would be somewhat safer to put parentheses around parameters of
> >> > a macro with parameters. Put it.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@xxxxxxx>
> >> > ---
> >> >  include/linux/llist.h | 6 +++---
> >> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/include/linux/llist.h b/include/linux/llist.h
> >> > index 1957635..e280b297 100644
> >> > --- a/include/linux/llist.h
> >> > +++ b/include/linux/llist.h
> >> > @@ -183,10 +183,10 @@ static inline void init_llist_head(struct llist_head
> *list)
> >> >   * reverse the order by yourself before traversing.
> >> >   */
> >> >  #define llist_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, node, member)
> >> 	       \
> >> > -	for (pos = llist_entry((node), typeof(*pos), member);		       \
> >> > +	for ((pos) = llist_entry((node), typeof(*(pos)), member);		       \
> >> >  	     member_address_is_nonnull(pos, member) &&
> >> 	       \
> >> > -	        (n = llist_entry(pos->member.next, typeof(*n), member), true); \
> >> > -	     pos = n)
> >> > +	        ((n) = llist_entry((pos)->member.next, typeof(*(n)), member), true);
> >> \
> >> > +	     (pos) = (n))
> >> >
> >> >  /**
> >> >   * llist_empty - tests whether a lock-less list is empty
> >>
> >> The original code follows the style of list_for_each_entry_safe().  The
> >
> > Hello Huang,
> >
> > I donât see what you say here exactly, but let me note that all llist macros
> > are safe except the llist_for_each_entry_safe().
> >
> >> parameters "pos" and "n" must be variable.  Because list_xxx family
> >> functions work well so far, I think we needn't to change it too.
> >
> > I see. I don't want to argue much wrt such a trivial thing but I think
> > it would be better to fix it since the fix is fairly simple and clear.
> > However, it's ok if the fix introduces a bad thing at least.
> 
> Yes, it's simple.  But I don't think it helps too.  Considering that
> list family functions with same style have no issues.

In addition, making all the llist macros implementation consistent is
also meaningful, isn't it?

Ok.

I think your opinion is right and mine is also meaningful. I will just
follow the majority opinion.

Thank you for giving an opinion.