Em Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:07:26PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:54:48AM -0700, tip-bot for Namhyung Kim wrote: > > -#define chain_for_each_child(child, parent) \ > > - list_for_each_entry(child, &parent->children, siblings) > > - > > -#define chain_for_each_child_safe(child, next, parent) \ > > - list_for_each_entry_safe(child, next, &parent->children, siblings) > > We can probably keep these APIs using the rb root iteration code. > > There should be an rb_node_for_each() anyway, and rb_node_for_each_entry(). > People > refused to have to have such an API because they feared it would encourage > blind use > of this O(n log n) iteration. There is plenty of such usecase in practice > though, especially > in perf. So I think we can now start to think about it for real.
I tried introducing one, PeterZ objected, on the grounds you mentioned, and I still think they are needed, agree with you. Just put a: /* DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER You should know what you're doing, PeterZ is watching you! I CAN NOT ACCEPT THAT PERSON ACTION */ or something like that above such helpers ;-) - Arnaldo -- 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/
