Gu Zheng <guz.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> writes:
> On 07/22/2013 11:36 PM, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote:
>
>> Gu Zheng <guz.f...@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.f...@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?
>
> No that, here list_for_each_entry is suitable, because we delete only one
> entry.
yeah, you're correct.
--
Nikola
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
