Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-18 Thread Peter Zijlstra
OK, picked up all 4: patches/byungchul_park-llist-provide_a_safe_version_for_llist_for_each.patch patches/byungchul_park-sched-don_t_reinvent_the_wheel_but_use_existing_llist_api.patch patches/byungchul_park-sched_rt-remove_unnecessary_condition_in_push_rt_task.patch

Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-18 Thread Peter Zijlstra
OK, picked up all 4: patches/byungchul_park-llist-provide_a_safe_version_for_llist_for_each.patch patches/byungchul_park-sched-don_t_reinvent_the_wheel_but_use_existing_llist_api.patch patches/byungchul_park-sched_rt-remove_unnecessary_condition_in_push_rt_task.patch

Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-17 Thread Byungchul Park
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:36:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering > loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be > modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, > that is,

Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-17 Thread Byungchul Park
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:36:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering > loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be > modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, > that is,

Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-17 Thread Byungchul Park
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:36:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering > loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be > modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, > that is,

Re: [RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-17 Thread Byungchul Park
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:36:56AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering > loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be > modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, > that is,

[RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-11 Thread Byungchul Park
Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, that is, llist_for_each_safe. Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park

[RESEND PATCH] llist: Provide a safe version for llist_for_each

2017-05-11 Thread Byungchul Park
Sometimes we have to dereference next field of llist node before entering loop becasue the node might be deleted or the next field might be modified within the loop. So this adds the safe version of llist_for_each, that is, llist_for_each_safe. Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park Reviewed-by: "Huang,