On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > Okay - but is your approach generic enough? What if there was a split > in the node that you copied? I don't have a full understanding but it > appears to be a very specific solution rather than a general one. You have a very good point. I have never thought about splitting the node. If split the node then there will be some ptr iterate twice. Because some node move to the next bucket and the dup node know nothing about it. It would be a problem for the existing code as well. My ptrlist ref count patch haven't check the split node situation. Even Luc's suggestion for "mark and sweep" to delete the ptrlist is not going to help with the nested loop split. I will add that check. I don't expect new offenders but let's make sure about it. It means it would be so much nicer if we can avoid nested loop modify at all. > I was just saying that you can use the standard /existing iterator > macros once you have duplicated the list. It was not mean to a temporary fix not generic. But may be just add a function for duplicate list is needed for long run. We try to avoid nest loop modify, if it has to be done. Outer loop use a duplicated list. 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
