From: zijun_hu <zijun...@htc.com>

many seq_file helpers exist for simplifying implementation of virtual files
especially, for /proc nodes. however, the helpers for iteration over
list_head are available but aren't adopted to implement /proc/vmallocinfo
currently.

simplify /proc/vmallocinfo implementation by existing seq_file helpers

Signed-off-by: zijun_hu <zijun...@htc.com>
---
 Changes in v2:
  - the redundant type cast is removed as advised by rient...@google.com
  - commit messages are updated

 mm/vmalloc.c | 27 +++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index f2481cb4e6b2..e73948afac70 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -2574,32 +2574,13 @@ void pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int 
nr_vms)
 static void *s_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
        __acquires(&vmap_area_lock)
 {
-       loff_t n = *pos;
-       struct vmap_area *va;
-
        spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
-       va = list_first_entry(&vmap_area_list, typeof(*va), list);
-       while (n > 0 && &va->list != &vmap_area_list) {
-               n--;
-               va = list_next_entry(va, list);
-       }
-       if (!n && &va->list != &vmap_area_list)
-               return va;
-
-       return NULL;
-
+       return seq_list_start(&vmap_area_list, *pos);
 }
 
 static void *s_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
 {
-       struct vmap_area *va = p, *next;
-
-       ++*pos;
-       next = list_next_entry(va, list);
-       if (&next->list != &vmap_area_list)
-               return next;
-
-       return NULL;
+       return seq_list_next(p, &vmap_area_list, pos);
 }
 
 static void s_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
@@ -2634,9 +2615,11 @@ static void show_numa_info(struct seq_file *m, struct 
vm_struct *v)
 
 static int s_show(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
 {
-       struct vmap_area *va = p;
+       struct vmap_area *va;
        struct vm_struct *v;
 
+       va = list_entry(p, struct vmap_area, list);
+
        /*
         * s_show can encounter race with remove_vm_area, !VM_VM_AREA on
         * behalf of vmap area is being tear down or vm_map_ram allocation.
-- 
1.9.1

Reply via email to