On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 12:55:24PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > That was my original plan. However, after looking at some existing users of > lockless list, they have coded in the dependency on the fact that a lockless > list is empty if it is NULL. I guess I can make this true also for the new > lockless list with sentinel at the expense of a bit more overhead in the > entry insertion path and deletion path. I will take a further look at that. There aren't that many users of llist. Maybe it'd be easier / cleaner to introduce a macro to test whether a llist is empty and replace the NULL tests? Thanks. -- tejun
