From: Michael Wang <hidden> Date: 2012-08-17 04:33:40
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
From: Paul E. McKenney <hidden> Date: 2012-08-20 23:42:00
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:33:29PM +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
Getting rid of list_for_each_continue_rcu() would indeed be a good thing!
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <redacted>
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
From: Michael Wang <hidden> Date: 2012-08-24 00:51:38
On 08/17/2012 12:33 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments on this patch?
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted hunk
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
From: Michael Wang <hidden> Date: 2012-09-10 08:30:27
On 08/24/2012 08:51 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
On 08/17/2012 12:33 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments on this patch?
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments?
And please forgive and warn me if this patch has came to the wrong
place...I get the address from get_maintainer.
Regards,
Michael Wang
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:30:11 +0800 Michael Wang [off-list ref]
wrote:
On 08/24/2012 08:51 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
On 08/17/2012 12:33 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments on this patch?
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments?
And please forgive and warn me if this patch has came to the wrong
place...I get the address from get_maintainer.
Sorry, August was a bad month.
Yes, patch looks good. Shall I include it in my tree, do you want to submit
them altogether through some rcu tree?
Either way is fine by me. If you want to submit it through some other tree,
Acked-by: NeilBrown [off-list ref]
If not, it'll probably appear in my -next soonish.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
From: Michael Wang <hidden> Date: 2012-09-11 06:27:53
On 09/11/2012 02:21 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:30:11 +0800 Michael Wang [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
On 08/24/2012 08:51 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
On 08/17/2012 12:33 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments on this patch?
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments?
And please forgive and warn me if this patch has came to the wrong
place...I get the address from get_maintainer.
Sorry, August was a bad month.
Yes, patch looks good. Shall I include it in my tree, do you want to submit
them altogether through some rcu tree?
Either way is fine by me. If you want to submit it through some other tree,
Acked-by: NeilBrown [off-list ref]
Thanks for your review ;-)
I think submit to rcu tree may be better, what's your opinion, Paul?
Regards,
Michael Wang
If not, it'll probably appear in my -next soonish.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
quoted
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */
From: Paul E. McKenney <hidden> Date: 2012-09-11 16:29:57
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:27:42PM +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
On 09/11/2012 02:21 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:30:11 +0800 Michael Wang [off-list ref]
wrote:
quoted
On 08/24/2012 08:51 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
On 08/17/2012 12:33 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
quoted
From: Michael Wang <redacted>
This patch replaces list_for_each_continue_rcu() with
list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu() to save a few lines
of code and allow removing list_for_each_continue_rcu().
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments on this patch?
Hi, Neil
Could I get some comments?
And please forgive and warn me if this patch has came to the wrong
place...I get the address from get_maintainer.
Sorry, August was a bad month.
Yes, patch looks good. Shall I include it in my tree, do you want to submit
them altogether through some rcu tree?
Either way is fine by me. If you want to submit it through some other tree,
Acked-by: NeilBrown [off-list ref]
Thanks for your review ;-)
I think submit to rcu tree may be better, what's your opinion, Paul?
I am fine either way. If I don't see it in mainline this coming merge
window, I will pull it into the -rcu tree.
Thanx, Paul
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
If not, it'll probably appear in my -next soonish.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
quoted
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Regards,
Michael Wang
quoted
Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <redacted>
---
drivers/md/bitmap.c | 9 +++------
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
@@ -163,20 +163,17 @@ static struct md_rdev *next_active_rdev(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mdde*Asdevicesareonlyaddedorremovedwhenraid_diskis<0and*nr_pendingis0andIn_syncisclear,theentrieswereturnwill*stillbeinthesamepositiononthelistwhenwere-enter-*list_for_each_continue_rcu.+*list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu.*/-structlist_head*pos;rcu_read_lock();if(rdev==NULL)/* start at the beginning */-pos=&mddev->disks;+rdev=list_entry_rcu(&mddev->disks,structmd_rdev,same_set);else{/* release the previous rdev and start from there. */rdev_dec_pending(rdev,mddev);-pos=&rdev->same_set;}-list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos,&mddev->disks){-rdev=list_entry(pos,structmd_rdev,same_set);+list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(rdev,&mddev->disks,same_set){if(rdev->raid_disk>=0&&!test_bit(Faulty,&rdev->flags)){/* this is a usable devices */