On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > The lock is also promoted to irq-safe (suggested by Dan).
>
> What was the reason for this other change? I'm sure Dan is a fine chap,
> but we usually prefer a little more justification for changes ;)
I added the info already, when I applied it to the tip-tree.
> > + /* Now free them */
> > + hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &freelist, node) {
> > + hlist_del(&obj->node);
> > + free_object(obj);
>
> I suspect that we can avoid the hlist_del() here, perhaps with a little
> effort.
>
> > +
> > + /* Now free them */
> > + hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &freelist, node) {
> > + hlist_del(&obj->node);
> > + free_object(obj);
> > + }
> > +
>
> and the other one.
>
> But I'm not sure that it's worth putting effort into - leaving dead
> objects strung onto a partially-live list is a little bit smelly IMO.
I really feel better, when we delete them instead of throwing them
away with pointers to each other.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
