On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 00:49:21 -0800
Cody P Schafer <c...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 11/01/2013 07:45 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 15:38:46 -0700
> > Cody P Schafer <c...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Use rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe() to destroy the rbtree instead
> >> of opencoding an alternate postorder iteration that modifies the tree
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Cody P Schafer <c...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/trace/trace_stat.c | 42 ++++++------------------------------------
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> >>
>
> >> + rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(snode, n, &session->stat_root,
> >> + node) {
> >
> > This is one of those cases that a line break is uglier than keeping it
> > on the same line. Heck, it's only 4 characters over the 80 char limit.
> >
>
> I'm fine with that being tweaked.
>
> > Other than that, I'm fine with this patch. Want me to take this
> > separately?
> >
>
> The patches in this patchset are all independent (they just happen to be
> making nearly identical changes throughout the tree), so feel free.
>
OK, I'll pull it in and modify the above change too.
Thanks,
-- Steve
--
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/
