On 04/13, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 08:37:27PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > +#define do_each_task_pid(who, type, task) \
> > + do { \
> > + struct hlist_node *pos___; \
> > + struct pid *pid___ = find_pid(who); \
> > + if (pid___ != NULL) \
> > + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu((task), pos___, \
> > + &pid___->tasks[type], pids[type].node) {
> > +
> > +#define while_each_task_pid(who, type, task) \
> > + } \
> > + } while (0)
>
> This is prtty ugly. Can't we just have a
>
> #define for_each_task_pid(task, pid, type, pos) \
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu((task), (pos), \
> (&(pid))->tasks[type], pids[type].node) {
>
> and move the find_pid to the caller? That would make the code a whole lot
> more readable.
Then the caller should check find_pid() doesn't return NULL. But yes,
we can hide this check inside for_each_task_pid().
But what about current users of do_each_task_pid ? We can't just remove
these macros.
Oleg.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
