Re: [PATCH 2/8] trace/trace_stat: use rbtree postorder iteration helper instead of opencoding
On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 00:49:21 -0800
Cody P Schafer wrote:
> On 11/01/2013 07:45 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 15:38:46 -0700
> > Cody P Schafer 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
> >> ---
> >> 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/
Re: [PATCH 2/8] trace/trace_stat: use rbtree postorder iteration helper instead of opencoding
On 11/01/2013 07:45 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 15:38:46 -0700
Cody P Schafer 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
---
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.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 2/8] trace/trace_stat: use rbtree postorder iteration helper instead of opencoding
On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 15:38:46 -0700
Cody P Schafer 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
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_stat.c | 42 ++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stat.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stat.c
> index 847f88a..fa53acc 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stat.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stat.c
> @@ -43,46 +43,16 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(all_stat_sessions_mutex);
> /* The root directory for all stat files */
> static struct dentry *stat_dir;
>
> -/*
> - * Iterate through the rbtree using a post order traversal path
> - * to release the next node.
> - * It won't necessary release one at each iteration
> - * but it will at least advance closer to the next one
> - * to be released.
> - */
> -static struct rb_node *release_next(struct tracer_stat *ts,
> - struct rb_node *node)
> +static void __reset_stat_session(struct stat_session *session)
> {
> - struct stat_node *snode;
> - struct rb_node *parent = rb_parent(node);
> -
> - if (node->rb_left)
> - return node->rb_left;
> - else if (node->rb_right)
> - return node->rb_right;
> - else {
> - if (!parent)
> - ;
> - else if (parent->rb_left == node)
> - parent->rb_left = NULL;
> - else
> - parent->rb_right = NULL;
> + struct stat_node *snode, *n;
>
> - snode = container_of(node, struct stat_node, node);
> - if (ts->stat_release)
> - ts->stat_release(snode->stat);
> + 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.
Other than that, I'm fine with this patch. Want me to take this
separately?
-- Steve
> + if (session->ts->stat_release)
> + session->ts->stat_release(snode->stat);
> kfree(snode);
> -
> - return parent;
> }
> -}
> -
> -static void __reset_stat_session(struct stat_session *session)
> -{
> - struct rb_node *node = session->stat_root.rb_node;
> -
> - while (node)
> - node = release_next(session->ts, node);
>
> session->stat_root = RB_ROOT;
> }
--
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/
