Le 07/04/2022 à 12:28, Jakob Koschel a écrit :
> In preparation to limit the scope of a list iterator to the list
> traversal loop, use a dedicated pointer to point to the found element [1].
> 
> Before, the code implicitly used the head when no element was found
> when using &pos->list. Since the new variable is only set if an
> element was found, the list_add() is performed within the loop
> and only done after the loop if it is done on the list head directly.
> 
> Link: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wgRr_D8CB-D9Kg-c=ehreask5sqxpwr9y7k9sa6cwx...@mail.gmail.com/
>  [1]
> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkosc...@gmail.com>
> ---
>   drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_vl.c | 14 +++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_vl.c 
> b/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_vl.c
> index b7e95d60a6e4..cfcae4d19eef 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_vl.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_vl.c
> @@ -27,20 +27,24 @@ static int sja1105_insert_gate_entry(struct 
> sja1105_gating_config *gating_cfg,
>       if (list_empty(&gating_cfg->entries)) {
>               list_add(&e->list, &gating_cfg->entries);
>       } else {
> -             struct sja1105_gate_entry *p;
> +             struct sja1105_gate_entry *p = NULL, *iter;
>   
> -             list_for_each_entry(p, &gating_cfg->entries, list) {
> -                     if (p->interval == e->interval) {
> +             list_for_each_entry(iter, &gating_cfg->entries, list) {
> +                     if (iter->interval == e->interval) {
>                               NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,
>                                                  "Gate conflict");
>                               rc = -EBUSY;
>                               goto err;
>                       }
>   
> -                     if (e->interval < p->interval)
> +                     if (e->interval < iter->interval) {
> +                             p = iter;
> +                             list_add(&e->list, iter->list.prev);
>                               break;
> +                     }
>               }
> -             list_add(&e->list, p->list.prev);
> +             if (!p)
> +                     list_add(&e->list, gating_cfg->entries.prev);
>       }
>   
>       gating_cfg->num_entries++;

This change looks ugly, why duplicating the list_add() to do the same ? 
At the end of the loop the pointer contains gating_cfg->entries, so it 
was cleaner before.

If you don't want to use the loop index outside the loop, fair enough, 
all you have to do is:

                struct sja1105_gate_entry *p, *iter;

                list_for_each_entry(iter, &gating_cfg->entries, list) {
                        if (iter->interval == e->interval) {
                                NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,
                                                   "Gate conflict");
                                rc = -EBUSY;
                                goto err;
                        }
                        p = iter;

                        if (e->interval < iter->interval)
                                break;
                }
                list_add(&e->list, p->list.prev);



Christophe

Reply via email to