Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Julia Lawall  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> >> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
>> >> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
>> >> them unique.
>> >>
>> >
>> > And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
>> > Signed off by line put:
>> Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.
>
> It should be ok.  There was a v1 that only did list_entry and where all
> the patches had the same subject, but Greg already dropped that one.

Yes, I have sent another patch where we only need to convert
container_of to list_entry, that is where there is no while loop
,since we now have much less cases of this type , I have sent only one
patch for it.

Regards,
Srishti
> julia
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Srishti
>> >
>> > ---
>> > v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> > dan carpenter
>>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Julia Lawall  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> >> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
>> >> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
>> >> them unique.
>> >>
>> >
>> > And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
>> > Signed off by line put:
>> Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.
>
> It should be ok.  There was a v1 that only did list_entry and where all
> the patches had the same subject, but Greg already dropped that one.

Yes, I have sent another patch where we only need to convert
container_of to list_entry, that is where there is no while loop
,since we now have much less cases of this type , I have sent only one
patch for it.

Regards,
Srishti
> julia
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Srishti
>> >
>> > ---
>> > v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> > dan carpenter
>>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
> >> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
> >> them unique.
> >>
> >
> > And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
> > Signed off by line put:
> Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.

It should be ok.  There was a v1 that only did list_entry and where all
the patches had the same subject, but Greg already dropped that one.

julia

>
> Regards,
> Srishti
> >
> > ---
> > v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
> >
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
> >> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
> >> them unique.
> >>
> >
> > And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
> > Signed off by line put:
> Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.

It should be ok.  There was a v1 that only did list_entry and where all
the patches had the same subject, but Greg already dropped that one.

julia

>
> Regards,
> Srishti
> >
> > ---
> > v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
> >
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
>> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
>> them unique.
>>
>
> And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
> Signed off by line put:
Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.

Regards,
Srishti
>
> ---
> v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Dan Carpenter  wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
>> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
>> them unique.
>>
>
> And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
> Signed off by line put:
Shouldn't it be only v2 as I haven't sent a v2 for this before.

Regards,
Srishti
>
> ---
> v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
> them unique.
> 

And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
Signed off by line put:

---
v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:34:05PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
> line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
> them unique.
> 

And the subject needs to start with [PATCH v3] and then after the
Signed off by line put:

---
v2 and v3: Changes to the subjects and changelogs.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Julia Lawall  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
>> > > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
>> > > > during traversal.
>> > >
>> > > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
>> > say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
>> > verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
>> > List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
>>^
>>
>> It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
>> original code, is that it's ugly as sin.
>>
>> > during the traversal"?
>>
>> The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
>> thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
>> the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
>> change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
>> use list_for_each_entry_safe."
>
> OK, Srishti, you can put that.  But change the subject lines too.
Ok will do ! Thanks again.
Regards,
Srishti
>
> julia
>
>>
>> regards,
>> dan carpenter
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "outreachy-kernel" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004144012.jciztelhwjdyzpwg%40mwanda.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Julia Lawall  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
>> > > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
>> > > > during traversal.
>> > >
>> > > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
>> > say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
>> > verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
>> > List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
>>^
>>
>> It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
>> original code, is that it's ugly as sin.
>>
>> > during the traversal"?
>>
>> The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
>> thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
>> the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
>> change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
>> use list_for_each_entry_safe."
>
> OK, Srishti, you can put that.  But change the subject lines too.
Ok will do ! Thanks again.
Regards,
Srishti
>
> julia
>
>>
>> regards,
>> dan carpenter
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "outreachy-kernel" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004144012.jciztelhwjdyzpwg%40mwanda.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > > > during traversal.
> > >
> > > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
> > say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
> > verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
> > List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
>^
>
> It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
> original code, is that it's ugly as sin.
>
> > during the traversal"?
>
> The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
> thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
> the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
> change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
> use list_for_each_entry_safe."

OK, Srishti, you can put that.  But change the subject lines too.

julia

>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004144012.jciztelhwjdyzpwg%40mwanda.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > > > during traversal.
> > >
> > > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
> > say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
> > verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
> > List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
>^
>
> It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
> original code, is that it's ugly as sin.
>
> > during the traversal"?
>
> The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
> thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
> the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
> change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
> use list_for_each_entry_safe."

OK, Srishti, you can put that.  But change the subject lines too.

julia

>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004144012.jciztelhwjdyzpwg%40mwanda.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > > during traversal.
> >
> > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
> 
> I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
> say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
> verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
> List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
   ^

It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
original code, is that it's ugly as sin.

> during the traversal"?

The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
use list_for_each_entry_safe."

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:39:30PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > > during traversal.
> >
> > This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.
> 
> I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
> say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
> verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
> List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
   ^

It is not *needed*, the original code works fine.  The problem with the
original code, is that it's ugly as sin.

> during the traversal"?

The changelog needs to say *why* we're applying the patch.  At first I
thought it was going to fix a use after free.  What I would prefer in
the changelog is something like:  "This patch is a cleanup and doesn't
change runtime behavior.  It changes an open coded list traversal to
use list_for_each_entry_safe."

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > during traversal.
>
> This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
during the traversal"?

thanks,
julia

>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004112103.cvu5ipkudfpz2adc%40mwanda.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 


On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> > Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> > during traversal.
>
> This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with the comment.  The commit doesn't
say that they were buggy.  Perhaps the commit message could have been more
verbose, like "Use list operators on list_head values.
List_for_each_entry_safe is needed because the list elements get deleted
during the traversal"?

thanks,
julia

>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20171004112103.cvu5ipkudfpz2adc%40mwanda.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 
Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
them unique.

julia

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:

> Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. Done
> by the following semantic patch by coccinelle.
>
> @r@
> struct list_head* l;
> expression e;
> identifier m,list_del_init,f;
> type T1;
> T1* pos;
> iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
> @@
>
> f(...){
>
> +T1* tmp;
> <+...
> -while(...)
> +list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
> {
> ...
> -pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
> ...
> -l=e;
>  <+...
>  list_del_init(>m)
>  ...+>
> }
> ...+>
>
> }
>
> Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 12 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
> b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> index a2c599f..551af9e 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ void  expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>  {
>   struct list_head *phead, *plist;
>   u8 updated = 0;
> - struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
> + struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
>   struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
>   u8 chk_alive_num = 0;
>   char chk_alive_list[NUM_STA];
> @@ -292,10 +292,7 @@ void expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>   plist = phead->next;
>
>   /* check auth_queue */
> - while (phead != plist) {
> - psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, auth_list);
> - plist = plist->next;
> -
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, auth_list) {
>   if (psta->expire_to > 0) {
>   psta->expire_to--;
>   if (psta->expire_to == 0) {
> @@ -326,10 +323,7 @@ void expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>   plist = phead->next;
>
>   /* check asoc_queue */
> - while (phead != plist) {
> - psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
> - plist = plist->next;
> -
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
>   if (chk_sta_is_alive(psta) || !psta->expire_to) {
>   psta->expire_to = pstapriv->expire_to;
>   psta->keep_alive_trycnt = 0;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/1507122755-5489-1-git-send-email-srishtishar%40gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Julia Lawall 
Again, you have three patches on different files with the same subject
line.  You could add the file name eg rtw_ap: to the subject line to make
them unique.

julia

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Srishti Sharma wrote:

> Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. Done
> by the following semantic patch by coccinelle.
>
> @r@
> struct list_head* l;
> expression e;
> identifier m,list_del_init,f;
> type T1;
> T1* pos;
> iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
> @@
>
> f(...){
>
> +T1* tmp;
> <+...
> -while(...)
> +list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
> {
> ...
> -pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
> ...
> -l=e;
>  <+...
>  list_del_init(>m)
>  ...+>
> }
> ...+>
>
> }
>
> Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 12 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
> b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> index a2c599f..551af9e 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ void  expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>  {
>   struct list_head *phead, *plist;
>   u8 updated = 0;
> - struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
> + struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
>   struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
>   u8 chk_alive_num = 0;
>   char chk_alive_list[NUM_STA];
> @@ -292,10 +292,7 @@ void expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>   plist = phead->next;
>
>   /* check auth_queue */
> - while (phead != plist) {
> - psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, auth_list);
> - plist = plist->next;
> -
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, auth_list) {
>   if (psta->expire_to > 0) {
>   psta->expire_to--;
>   if (psta->expire_to == 0) {
> @@ -326,10 +323,7 @@ void expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
>   plist = phead->next;
>
>   /* check asoc_queue */
> - while (phead != plist) {
> - psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
> - plist = plist->next;
> -
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
>   if (chk_sta_is_alive(psta) || !psta->expire_to) {
>   psta->expire_to = pstapriv->expire_to;
>   psta->keep_alive_trycnt = 0;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-ker...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/1507122755-5489-1-git-send-email-srishtishar%40gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. 
Done using the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m, list_del_init, f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
<+...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
  list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...+>
}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c | 8 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
index 52f31c7..4e1d06c 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
@@ -5446,6 +5446,7 @@ u8 mlme_evt_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char 
*pbuf)
 
 u8 tx_beacon_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char *pbuf)
 {
+   struct xmit_frame *tmp;
if (send_beacon(padapter) == _FAIL) {
DBG_88E("issue_beacon, fail!\n");
return H2C_PARAMETERS_ERROR;
@@ -5469,11 +5470,8 @@ u8 tx_beacon_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char 
*pbuf)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(_bmc->sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, 
struct xmit_frame, list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp,
+xmitframe_plist, list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
psta_bmc->sleepq_len--;
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. 
Done using the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m, list_del_init, f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
<+...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
  list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...+>
}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c | 8 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
index 52f31c7..4e1d06c 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
@@ -5446,6 +5446,7 @@ u8 mlme_evt_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char 
*pbuf)
 
 u8 tx_beacon_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char *pbuf)
 {
+   struct xmit_frame *tmp;
if (send_beacon(padapter) == _FAIL) {
DBG_88E("issue_beacon, fail!\n");
return H2C_PARAMETERS_ERROR;
@@ -5469,11 +5470,8 @@ u8 tx_beacon_hdl(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char 
*pbuf)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(_bmc->sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, 
struct xmit_frame, list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp,
+xmitframe_plist, list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
psta_bmc->sleepq_len--;
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make code more compact. Done 
using the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m,list_del_init,f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;

<+...

-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
 list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}

...+>

}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c | 23 ++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
index e8d9858..6d8820b 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
@@ -1869,7 +1869,7 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
u8 update_mask = 0, wmmps_ac = 0;
struct sta_info *psta_bmc;
struct list_head *xmitframe_plist, *xmitframe_phead;
-   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL;
+   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
 
spin_lock_bh(>sleep_q.lock);
@@ -1877,11 +1877,7 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(>sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct xmit_frame, 
list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist, list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
switch (pxmitframe->attrib.priority) {
@@ -1958,11 +1954,8 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(_bmc->sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct 
xmit_frame, list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist,
+list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
psta_bmc->sleepq_len--;
@@ -1997,7 +1990,7 @@ void xmit_delivery_enabled_frames(struct adapter 
*padapter, struct sta_info *pst
 {
u8 wmmps_ac = 0;
struct list_head *xmitframe_plist, *xmitframe_phead;
-   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL;
+   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
 
spin_lock_bh(>sleep_q.lock);
@@ -2005,11 +1998,7 @@ void xmit_delivery_enabled_frames(struct adapter 
*padapter, struct sta_info *pst
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(>sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct xmit_frame, 
list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist, list) {
switch (pxmitframe->attrib.priority) {
case 1:
case 2:
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make code more compact. Done 
using the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m,list_del_init,f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;

<+...

-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
 list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}

...+>

}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c | 23 ++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
index e8d9858..6d8820b 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
@@ -1869,7 +1869,7 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
u8 update_mask = 0, wmmps_ac = 0;
struct sta_info *psta_bmc;
struct list_head *xmitframe_plist, *xmitframe_phead;
-   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL;
+   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
 
spin_lock_bh(>sleep_q.lock);
@@ -1877,11 +1877,7 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(>sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct xmit_frame, 
list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist, list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
switch (pxmitframe->attrib.priority) {
@@ -1958,11 +1954,8 @@ void wakeup_sta_to_xmit(struct adapter *padapter, struct 
sta_info *psta)
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(_bmc->sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct 
xmit_frame, list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist,
+list) {
list_del_init(>list);
 
psta_bmc->sleepq_len--;
@@ -1997,7 +1990,7 @@ void xmit_delivery_enabled_frames(struct adapter 
*padapter, struct sta_info *pst
 {
u8 wmmps_ac = 0;
struct list_head *xmitframe_plist, *xmitframe_phead;
-   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL;
+   struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
 
spin_lock_bh(>sleep_q.lock);
@@ -2005,11 +1998,7 @@ void xmit_delivery_enabled_frames(struct adapter 
*padapter, struct sta_info *pst
xmitframe_phead = get_list_head(>sleep_q);
xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_phead->next;
 
-   while (xmitframe_phead != xmitframe_plist) {
-   pxmitframe = container_of(xmitframe_plist, struct xmit_frame, 
list);
-
-   xmitframe_plist = xmitframe_plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(pxmitframe, tmp, xmitframe_plist, list) {
switch (pxmitframe->attrib.priority) {
case 1:
case 2:
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. Done 
by the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m,list_del_init,f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
<+...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
 list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...+>

}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 12 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
index a2c599f..551af9e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ voidexpire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
u8 updated = 0;
-   struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
+   struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
u8 chk_alive_num = 0;
char chk_alive_list[NUM_STA];
@@ -292,10 +292,7 @@ void   expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* check auth_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, auth_list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, auth_list) {
if (psta->expire_to > 0) {
psta->expire_to--;
if (psta->expire_to == 0) {
@@ -326,10 +323,7 @@ void   expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* check asoc_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
if (chk_sta_is_alive(psta) || !psta->expire_to) {
psta->expire_to = pstapriv->expire_to;
psta->keep_alive_trycnt = 0;
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make the code more compact. Done 
by the following semantic patch by coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m,list_del_init,f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
<+...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
 list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...+>

}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 12 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
index a2c599f..551af9e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ voidexpire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
u8 updated = 0;
-   struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
+   struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
u8 chk_alive_num = 0;
char chk_alive_list[NUM_STA];
@@ -292,10 +292,7 @@ void   expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* check auth_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, auth_list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, auth_list) {
if (psta->expire_to > 0) {
psta->expire_to--;
if (psta->expire_to == 0) {
@@ -326,10 +323,7 @@ void   expire_timeout_chk(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* check asoc_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
if (chk_sta_is_alive(psta) || !psta->expire_to) {
psta->expire_to = pstapriv->expire_to;
psta->keep_alive_trycnt = 0;
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> during traversal.

This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-04 Thread Dan Carpenter 
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:58:32AM +0530, Srishti Sharma wrote:
> Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
> during traversal.

This patch is fine as a cleanup but none of these are actually buggy.

regards,
dan carpenter

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-03 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
during traversal. Done using the following semantic patch by
coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m, list_del_init, f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
  list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...
}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 22 ++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
index 32a4837..a2c599f 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
@@ -1196,7 +1196,7 @@ int rtw_acl_add_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *addr)
 int rtw_acl_remove_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *addr)
 {
struct list_head *plist, *phead;
-   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode;
+   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct wlan_acl_pool *pacl_list = >acl_list;
struct __queue *pacl_node_q = _list->acl_node_q;
@@ -1208,10 +1208,7 @@ int rtw_acl_remove_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 
*addr)
phead = get_list_head(pacl_node_q);
plist = phead->next;
 
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   paclnode = container_of(plist, struct rtw_wlan_acl_node, list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(paclnode, tmp, plist, list) {
if (!memcmp(paclnode->addr, addr, ETH_ALEN)) {
if (paclnode->valid) {
paclnode->valid = false;
@@ -1711,7 +1708,7 @@ u8 ap_free_sta(struct adapter *padapter, struct sta_info 
*psta,
 int rtw_sta_flush(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
-   struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
+   struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct mlme_ext_priv *pmlmeext = >mlmeextpriv;
struct mlme_ext_info*pmlmeinfo = >mlmext_info;
@@ -1727,11 +1724,7 @@ int rtw_sta_flush(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* free sta asoc_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
-
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
list_del_init(>asoc_list);
pstapriv->asoc_list_cnt--;
 
@@ -1833,7 +1826,7 @@ void start_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
 void stop_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
-   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode;
+   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode, *tmp;
struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct mlme_priv *pmlmepriv = >mlmepriv;
@@ -1855,10 +1848,7 @@ void stop_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
spin_lock_bh(_node_q->lock);
phead = get_list_head(pacl_node_q);
plist = phead->next;
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   paclnode = container_of(plist, struct rtw_wlan_acl_node, list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(paclnode, tmp, plist, list) {
if (paclnode->valid) {
paclnode->valid = false;
 
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: core: Use list_for_each_entry_safe

2017-10-03 Thread Srishti Sharma 
Use list_for_each_entry_safe when the list elements may get deleted
during traversal. Done using the following semantic patch by
coccinelle.

@r@
struct list_head* l;
expression e;
identifier m, list_del_init, f;
type T1;
T1* pos;
iterator name list_for_each_entry_safe;
@@

f(...){

+T1* tmp;
...
-while(...)
+list_for_each_entry_safe(pos,tmp,l,m)
{
...
-pos = container_of(l,T1,m);
...
-l=e;
 <+...
  list_del_init(>m)
 ...+>
}
...
}

Signed-off-by: Srishti Sharma 
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 22 ++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c 
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
index 32a4837..a2c599f 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
@@ -1196,7 +1196,7 @@ int rtw_acl_add_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *addr)
 int rtw_acl_remove_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *addr)
 {
struct list_head *plist, *phead;
-   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode;
+   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct wlan_acl_pool *pacl_list = >acl_list;
struct __queue *pacl_node_q = _list->acl_node_q;
@@ -1208,10 +1208,7 @@ int rtw_acl_remove_sta(struct adapter *padapter, u8 
*addr)
phead = get_list_head(pacl_node_q);
plist = phead->next;
 
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   paclnode = container_of(plist, struct rtw_wlan_acl_node, list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(paclnode, tmp, plist, list) {
if (!memcmp(paclnode->addr, addr, ETH_ALEN)) {
if (paclnode->valid) {
paclnode->valid = false;
@@ -1711,7 +1708,7 @@ u8 ap_free_sta(struct adapter *padapter, struct sta_info 
*psta,
 int rtw_sta_flush(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
-   struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
+   struct sta_info *psta = NULL, *tmp;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct mlme_ext_priv *pmlmeext = >mlmeextpriv;
struct mlme_ext_info*pmlmeinfo = >mlmext_info;
@@ -1727,11 +1724,7 @@ int rtw_sta_flush(struct adapter *padapter)
plist = phead->next;
 
/* free sta asoc_queue */
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   psta = container_of(plist, struct sta_info, asoc_list);
-
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(psta, tmp, plist, asoc_list) {
list_del_init(>asoc_list);
pstapriv->asoc_list_cnt--;
 
@@ -1833,7 +1826,7 @@ void start_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
 void stop_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
 {
struct list_head *phead, *plist;
-   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode;
+   struct rtw_wlan_acl_node *paclnode, *tmp;
struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
struct sta_priv *pstapriv = >stapriv;
struct mlme_priv *pmlmepriv = >mlmepriv;
@@ -1855,10 +1848,7 @@ void stop_ap_mode(struct adapter *padapter)
spin_lock_bh(_node_q->lock);
phead = get_list_head(pacl_node_q);
plist = phead->next;
-   while (phead != plist) {
-   paclnode = container_of(plist, struct rtw_wlan_acl_node, list);
-   plist = plist->next;
-
+   list_for_each_entry_safe(paclnode, tmp, plist, list) {
if (paclnode->valid) {
paclnode->valid = false;
 
-- 
2.7.4