[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Improved <linux/lists.h>
    On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 07:02:34PM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
    > Borislav Deianov wrote:
    > > AFAIK, linux/list.h is the recommended linked list implementation,
    > > consider using that instead.
    > This one also doesn't really solve the offset problem. In the
    > version that I've proposed, there's no overhead if the offsets are
    > equal, and it works if the offsets differ.

    The linux/list.h implementation is a bit weird at first (at least I
    found it so) but is perfectly adequate and very neat once you get used
    to it. Here is your example program rewritten to use linux/list.h
    (modulo insertion/traversal order - easily changeable):

    ------------------------ <list.c> ------------------------
    #include <stdio.h>
    #include "list.h"

    struct node {
    int data;
    struct list_head list;

    int main(void)
    struct list_head queue, *tmp;
    struct node n1, n2, n3; = 1; = 2; = 3;

    list_add(&n1.list, &queue);
    list_add(&n2.list, &queue);
    list_add(&n3.list, &queue);
    tmp =;
    while(tmp != &queue) {
    struct node *n = list_entry(tmp, struct node, list);
    printf("%d\n", n->data);
    tmp = tmp->next;
    ------------------------ </list.c> -----------------------


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.025 / U:6.516 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site