On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote: > Good catch, thanks! The container_of is the way to go. > Do you have valid reasons not to move the list_head to the top? It's > not a big deal but it would save computing and summing the offset. It > doesn't seem name (the current first element) really needs to stay > there.
I checked x86_64 and riscv64, the generated assembly of this function before & after moving the list_head on top is almost the same except for some instructions' intermediate values. Both architectures have instructions which load data at (pointer + offset), so this offset computing does not require any extra instruction. Best regards, Nam
