On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar
<mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think that duplicating a list because that list is being modified is
> quite a sensible thing to do. My only suggestion would be that perhaps
> you could have a dup() step that is separate so that you can use the
> normal iterator macro after duplicating.
So are you suggesting some thing like this:
struct ptr_list *dup_list = NULL:
concat_ptr_list(orign_list, &dup_list);
FOR_EACH_PTR(dup_list, ptr) {
...
} END_FOR_EACH_PTR(ptr);
free_ptr_list(dup_list);
I think that should work. But it come with a price
allocating and freeing the list (otherwise it is a memory leak).
Also run slightly slower. My current way will only duplicate
the list struct one at a time. It never duplicate the full list.
It has fixed memory usage, no allocating, no duplicate of
the ->next and ->prev pointer.
So what macro do you have in mind? I think any thing modify
the duplicate list does not make sense.
On thing I can do is rename the __list into __orig, then rename
__dup into __list. Then most of the list macro using __list should
work. It also means I have to use END_FOR_EACH_PTR_DUP()
as well.
Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
