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
