Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:58:26 +0800 | From | Zhaolei <> | Subject | [PATCH 1/4] trace_workqueue: use list_for_each_entry() instead of list_for_each_entry_safe() |
| |
No need to use list_for_each_entry_safe() in iteration without delete node, we use list_for_each_entry() instead.
Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> --- kernel/trace/trace_workqueue.c | 10 ++++------ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_workqueue.c b/kernel/trace/trace_workqueue.c index 984b917..934b27c 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_workqueue.c @@ -47,12 +47,11 @@ probe_workqueue_insertion(struct task_struct *wq_thread, struct work_struct *work) { int cpu = cpumask_first(&wq_thread->cpus_allowed); - struct cpu_workqueue_stats *node, *next; + struct cpu_workqueue_stats *node; unsigned long flags; spin_lock_irqsave(&workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->lock, flags); - list_for_each_entry_safe(node, next, &workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->list, - list) { + list_for_each_entry(node, &workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->list, list) { if (node->pid == wq_thread->pid) { atomic_inc(&node->inserted); goto found; @@ -69,12 +68,11 @@ probe_workqueue_execution(struct task_struct *wq_thread, struct work_struct *work) { int cpu = cpumask_first(&wq_thread->cpus_allowed); - struct cpu_workqueue_stats *node, *next; + struct cpu_workqueue_stats *node; unsigned long flags; spin_lock_irqsave(&workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->lock, flags); - list_for_each_entry_safe(node, next, &workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->list, - list) { + list_for_each_entry(node, &workqueue_cpu_stat(cpu)->list, list) { if (node->pid == wq_thread->pid) { node->executed++; goto found; -- 1.5.5.3
| |