Re: [PATCH 1/6] rhashtable: improve documentation for rhashtable_walk_peek()

[NeilBrown]

On Wed, Mar 28 2018, Andreas GrÃnbacher wrote:

> Neil,
>
> 2018-03-27 1:33 GMT+02:00 NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxx>:
>> The documentation for rhashtable_walk_peek() wrong.  It claims to
>> return the *next* entry, whereas it in fact returns the *previous*
>> entry.
>> However if no entries have yet been returned - or if the iterator
>> was reset due to a resize event, then rhashtable_walk_peek()
>> *does* return the next entry, but also advances the iterator.
>>
>> I suspect that this interface should be discarded and the one user
>> should be changed to not require it.  Possibly this patch should be
>> seen as a first step in that conversation.
>>
>> This patch mostly corrects the documentation, but does make a
>> small code change so that the documentation can be correct without
>> listing too many special cases.  I don't think the one user will
>> be affected by the code change.
>
> how about I come up with a replacement so that we can remove
> rhashtable_walk_peek straight away without making it differently
> broken in the meantime?
>

Hi Andreas,
 I'd be very happy with that outcome - thanks for the offer!

NeilBrown

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature