On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 3:04 AM Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This should do. See below.
Looks fine.
> > Then that second loop very naturally becomes a "do { } while ()" one.
>
> I don't see it. I haven't found a reasonable way to rework it do-while.
Now that you return early for the "HEAD == NULL" case, this loop:
for (; head; head = xas_next_entry(&xas, end_pgoff)) {
[...]
}
very naturally becomes
do {
[...]
} while ((head = xas_next_entry(&xas, end_pgoff)) != NULL);
because the initial test for 'head' being NULL is no longer needed,
and thus it's a lot more logical to just test it at the end of the
loop when we update it.
No?
Maybe I'm missing something silly.
Linus
