On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 10:14 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 06/01/2014 01:53 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > struct optimistic_spin_queue {
> > - struct optimistic_spin_queue *next, *prev;
> > + atomic_pointer_t next;
> > + struct optimistic_spin_queue *prev;
> > int locked; /* 1 if lock acquired */
> > };
>
> Is there a way to do it without changing the pointer type? It will make
> the code harder to read and understand.
I agree that it would be nice if there is a way to fix this without
changing the pointer type of "next". The change of the type to
atomic_pointer_t might make it less obvious what "next" is for. This is
then compounded with "prev" being kept as a pointer to
optimistic_spin_queue, which can further make it appear as if "next" may
potentially point to something different.
--
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/
