Messages in this thread | | | From | Nikola Pajkovsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] f2fs: use list_for_each rather than list_for_each_safe, in remove_orphan_inode() | Date | Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:36:45 +0200 |
| |
Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> writes:
> As we remove the target single node, so list_for_each is enought, in order to > clean up, we use list_for_each_entry instead. > > Signed-off-by: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 5 ++--- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > index 290db04..87f7bc2 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > @@ -237,13 +237,12 @@ out: > > void remove_orphan_inode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t ino) > { > - struct list_head *this, *next, *head; > + struct list_head *head; > struct orphan_inode_entry *orphan; > > mutex_lock(&sbi->orphan_inode_mutex); > head = &sbi->orphan_inode_list; > - list_for_each_safe(this, next, head) { > - orphan = list_entry(this, struct orphan_inode_entry, list); > + list_for_each_entry(orphan, head, list) { > if (orphan->ino == ino) { > list_del(&orphan->list); > kmem_cache_free(orphan_entry_slab, orphan);
you have meant list_for_each_entry_safe, haven't you?
-- Nikola
| |