On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 02:22:45AM -0700, Matthew Helsley wrote: > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 18:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > The _safe list iterators make a blanket statement about how they are > > safe against removal. This patch, inspired by private conversations > > with people who unwisely but perhaps understandably took this blanket > > statement at its word, adds comments stating limits to this safety. > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > > > list.h | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) > > > > diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.22/include/linux/list.h > > linux-2.6.22-safedoc/include/linux/list.h > > --- linux-2.6.22/include/linux/list.h 2007-07-08 16:32:17.000000000 > > -0700 > > +++ linux-2.6.22-safedoc/include/linux/list.h 2007-09-12 > > 17:45:38.000000000 -0700 > > @@ -472,6 +472,12 @@ static inline void list_splice_init_rcu( > > * @pos: the &struct list_head to use as a loop cursor. > > * @n: another &struct list_head to use as temporary storage > > * @head: the head for your list. > > + * > > + * Please note that this is safe only against removal by the code in > > I'm not trying to be snarky but how far should we go before expecting > folks to read the macros? Depending on the answer you may also want to > mention that without additional additional code it's safe only against > removal of the list element at pos.
Good question. In fact, I would have agreed with you before coming across people who in my experience are generally reasonably well clued in who were confused about this. Thanx, Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/