On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 11:26:56AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote: > Now we use rb_parent to get next, while this is not necessary. > > When prev is NULL, this means vma should be the first element in the > list. Then next should be current first one (mm->mmap), no matter > whether we have parent or not. > > After removing it, the code shows the beauty of symmetry. Uhh ... did you test this? > @@ -273,12 +273,8 @@ void __vma_link_list(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma, > next = prev->vm_next; > prev->vm_next = vma; > } else { > + next = mm->mmap; > mm->mmap = vma; > - if (rb_parent) > - next = rb_entry(rb_parent, > - struct vm_area_struct, vm_rb); > - else > - next = NULL; > } The full context is: if (prev) { next = prev->vm_next; prev->vm_next = vma; } else { mm->mmap = vma; if (rb_parent) next = rb_entry(rb_parent, struct vm_area_struct, vm_rb); else next = NULL; } Let's imagine we have a small tree with three ranges in it. A: 5-7 B: 8-10 C: 11-13 I would imagine an rbtree for this case has B at the top with A to its left and B to its right. Now we're going to add range D at 3-4. 'next' should clearly be range A. It will have NULL prev. Your code is going to make 'B' next, not A. Right?