[PATCH 03/10] staging: lustre: ldlm: use list_first_entry in ldlm_lock

[NeilBrown]

This make the code (slightly) more readable.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxx>
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_lock.c |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_lock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_lock.c
index b5d84f3f6071..ed061cc46986 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_lock.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_lock.c
@@ -1685,7 +1685,7 @@ ldlm_work_bl_ast_lock(struct ptlrpc_request_set *rqset, void *opaq)
 	if (list_empty(arg->list))
 		return -ENOENT;
 
-	lock = list_entry(arg->list->next, struct ldlm_lock, l_bl_ast);
+	lock = list_first_entry(arg->list, struct ldlm_lock, l_bl_ast);
 
 	/* nobody should touch l_bl_ast */
 	lock_res_and_lock(lock);
@@ -1721,7 +1721,7 @@ ldlm_work_cp_ast_lock(struct ptlrpc_request_set *rqset, void *opaq)
 	if (list_empty(arg->list))
 		return -ENOENT;
 
-	lock = list_entry(arg->list->next, struct ldlm_lock, l_cp_ast);
+	lock = list_first_entry(arg->list, struct ldlm_lock, l_cp_ast);
 
 	/* It's possible to receive a completion AST before we've set
 	 * the l_completion_ast pointer: either because the AST arrived
@@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ ldlm_work_revoke_ast_lock(struct ptlrpc_request_set *rqset, void *opaq)
 	if (list_empty(arg->list))
 		return -ENOENT;
 
-	lock = list_entry(arg->list->next, struct ldlm_lock, l_rk_ast);
+	lock = list_first_entry(arg->list, struct ldlm_lock, l_rk_ast);
 	list_del_init(&lock->l_rk_ast);
 
 	/* the desc just pretend to exclusive */
@@ -1794,7 +1794,7 @@ static int ldlm_work_gl_ast_lock(struct ptlrpc_request_set *rqset, void *opaq)
 	if (list_empty(arg->list))
 		return -ENOENT;
 
-	gl_work = list_entry(arg->list->next, struct ldlm_glimpse_work,
+	gl_work = list_first_entry(arg->list, struct ldlm_glimpse_work,
 			     gl_list);
 	list_del_init(&gl_work->gl_list);