Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:28:16 -0700 (PDT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm: introduce for_each_vma helpers |
| |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 16:46:48 -0700 Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 00:52 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:45:23AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > > > The most common way of iterating through the list of vmas, is via: > > > > for (vma = mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) > > > > > > > > This patch replaces this logic with a new for_each_vma(vma) helper, > > > > which 1) encapsulates this logic, and 2) make it easier to read. > > > > > > Why does it need to be encapsulated? > > > Do you have problem with reading plain for()? > > > > > > Your for_each_vma(vma) assumes "mm" from the scope. This can be confusing > > > for reader: whether it uses "mm" from the scope or "current->mm". This > > > will lead to very hard to find bug one day. > > > > I think its fairly obvious to see where the mm is coming from -- the > > helpers *do not* necessarily use current, it uses whatever mm was > > already there in the first place. I have not changed anything related to > > this from the callers. > > It is a bit of a hand-grenade for those (rare) situations where code is > dealing with other-tasks-mm. It's simple enough to add an `mm' arg? > > > The only related change I can think of, is for some callers that do: > > > > for (vma = current->mm->mmap; vma != NULL; vma = vma->vm_next) > > > > So we just add a local mm from current->mm and replace the for() with > > for_each_vma(). I don't see anything particularly ambiguous with that. > > Adding a local to support a macro which secretly uses that local is > pretty nasty. > > > Overall, I'm not really sure that > > - for (vma = mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) { > + for_each_vma(mm, vma) { > > is much of an improvement. I'll wait to see what others think...
... I'm with Kirill: obscuring a simple for loop is unhelpful - unless it's a prelude to a grand enhancement under the hood?
As to the hidden mm argument: a momentary lapse of taste, I hope.
Hugh
| |