On 11/06/18 02:51, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > The list walking macros are relatively complex and the code they define > have often 5 or 6 level of nesting. > > However, in a few places, a small rewrite of the code can save one > nesting level and this help to make the code more readable. > > Make this change and reduce the indentation level. > > Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > ptrlist.h | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/ptrlist.h b/ptrlist.h > index 037fe28ff..c28abce6d 100644 > --- a/ptrlist.h > +++ b/ptrlist.h > @@ -157,44 +157,42 @@ static inline void *last_ptr_list(struct ptr_list *list) > #define DO_FOR_EACH(head, ptr, __head, __list, __nr, PTR_ENTRY) do { \ > __typeof__(head) __head = head; \ > __typeof__(head) __list = head; \ > - if (__head) { \ > - do { int __nr; \ > - for (__nr = 0; __nr < __list->nr; __nr++) { \ > - do { \ > - ptr = PTR_ENTRY(__list,__nr); \ > - if (__list->rm && !ptr) \ > - continue; \ > - do { > + if (!__head) break; \ This patch is difficult to read (not your fault), so I will only say that I think it is correct. ;-) Again, not your fault, but it is not helped by this pattern: > + do { int __nr; \ > + for (__nr = 0; __nr < __list->nr; __nr++) { \ ... which declares the __nr variable on the 'do {' line. This case is not the worst, but it throws off the indentation level, for the sake of saving one line! :( ATB, Ramsay Jones -- 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