[PATCH v5 3/5] vfs: Remove unnecessary list_for_each_entry_safe() variants
From: Waiman Long <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-09 16:53:10
Also in:
lkml
Subsystem:
filesystems (vfs and infrastructure), the rest · Maintainers:
Alexander Viro, Christian Brauner, Linus Torvalds
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> evict_inodes() and invalidate_inodes() use list_for_each_entry_safe() to iterate sb->s_inodes list. However, since we use i_lru list entry for our local temporary list of inodes to destroy, the inode is guaranteed to stay in sb->s_inodes list while we hold sb->s_inode_list_lock. So there is no real need for safe iteration variant and we can use list_for_each_entry() just fine. Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <redacted> --- fs/inode.c | 8 ++++---- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index 7e3ef3a..640d4f8 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c@@ -599,12 +599,12 @@ static void dispose_list(struct list_head *head) */ void evict_inodes(struct super_block *sb) { - struct inode *inode, *next; + struct inode *inode; LIST_HEAD(dispose); again: spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock); - list_for_each_entry_safe(inode, next, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) { + list_for_each_entry(inode, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) { if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) continue;
@@ -649,11 +649,11 @@ again: int invalidate_inodes(struct super_block *sb, bool kill_dirty) { int busy = 0; - struct inode *inode, *next; + struct inode *inode; LIST_HEAD(dispose); spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock); - list_for_each_entry_safe(inode, next, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) { + list_for_each_entry(inode, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) { spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); if (inode->i_state & (I_NEW | I_FREEING | I_WILL_FREE)) { spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
--
1.7.1