[PATCH v2 00/14] list: Prepare entry iterators to cache cursor state

[Christian König]

On 6/11/26 10:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 10:01:25AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>> On 6/10/26 17:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 11:11:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>>>> On 6/10/26 10:18, Kaitao Cheng wrote:
>>>>> 在 2026/6/10 16:07, Christian König 写道:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>>> Should we revert to v1, or keep list_for_each_entry() and
>>>>> list_for_each_entry_safe() as they are, close this thread, and make no
>>>>> changes?
>>>>>
>>>>> Link to v1:
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260529082149.76764-1-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev/
>>>>>
>>>>> Or do you have any better suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> v1 looks perfectly reasonable to me.
>>>
>>> But why not just hiding that once for all (in case they don't use the temporary
>>> iterator)? Easy to automate, robust — everyone is happy?
>>
>> As far as I can see that is an extremely bad idea.
>>
>> The distinction between the use cases of 'iterating the list' and 'iterating
>> the list while you modify it' is completely intentional.
> 
> What I meant is to keep the name, just drop the parameter (make it hidden and
> being defined inside list_for_each_*_safe() cases).

Ah, sorry I was still thinking the suggestion is to merge list_for_each_entry() and list_for_each_entry_safe().

If the modification is done all at once or in steps doesn't really matter for me as long as the patch can be re-created reproducible.

But I'm wondering if we couldn't improve the name at the same time. The _safe() postfix has caused tons of confusion where especially beginners thought that it is a thread-safe variant, which it clearly isn't.

The _mutable() postfix sounds like a much better description to what happens here.

Regards,
Christian.

> 
>> See the bool type can be implemented by int as well, but it is just a
>> different use case.
> 
>>>> You should just include some patches in the same patch set to actually use
>>>> the new macros.
>>>>
>>>> If you modify the files under drivers/dma-buf or drivers/gpu/drm/amd to use
>>>> the new macro I'm happy to review that.
>>>
>>
>