netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch 01/26] list_for_each: net-ipv6-ip6_fib.c

To: domen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [patch 01/26] list_for_each: net-ipv6-ip6_fib.c
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:40:40 +0900 (JST)
Cc: jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, janitor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050306103238.86F181E46E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: USAGI Project
References: <20050306103238.86F181E46E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
In article <20050306103238.86F181E46E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Sun, 06 Mar 2005 
11:32:38 +0100), domen@xxxxxxxxxxxx says:

> s/for/list_for_each/
> Compile tested.
:
> +++ kj-domen/net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c       2005-03-05 16:09:09.000000000 +0100
> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ struct fib6_walker_t fib6_walker_list = 
>       .next   = &fib6_walker_list, 
>  };
>  
> -#define FOR_WALKERS(w) for ((w)=fib6_walker_list.next; (w) != 
> &fib6_walker_list; (w)=(w)->next)
> +#define FOR_WALKERS(w) list_for_each((w), &fib6_walker_list)
>  
>  static __inline__ u32 fib6_new_sernum(void)
>  {

Please don't. fib6_walker_list is not for fib6_walker_t but list_head.
(Or, why don't you convert fib6_walker_t to use list_head families?)

--yoshfuji

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>