Re: [PATCH 1/7] qemu/queue: add some useful QLIST_ and QTAILQ_ macros

[Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy]

01.02.2021 11:29, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> writes:
>
> > Add QLIST_FOREACH_FUNC_SAFE(), QTAILQ_FOREACH_FUNC_SAFE() and
> > QTAILQ_POP_HEAD(), to be used in following commit.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
> > ---
> >   include/qemu/queue.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/qemu/queue.h b/include/qemu/queue.h
> > index e029e7bf66..03e1fce85f 100644
> > --- a/include/qemu/queue.h
> > +++ b/include/qemu/queue.h
> > @@ -173,6 +173,13 @@ struct {                                                   
> >              \
> >                   (var) && ((next_var) = ((var)->field.le_next), 1);      \
> >                   (var) = (next_var))
> >   
> > +#define QLIST_FOREACH_FUNC_SAFE(head, field, func) do {                 \
> > +    typeof(*QLIST_FIRST(head)) *qffs_var, *qffs_next_var;               \
> > +    QLIST_FOREACH_SAFE(qffs_var, (head), field, qffs_next_var) {        \
> > +        (func)(qffs_var);                                               \
> > +    }                                                                   \
> > +} while (/*CONSTCOND*/0)
> > +
> >   /*
> >    * List access methods.
> >    */
> > @@ -490,6 +497,13 @@ union {                                                    
> >              \
> >                (var) && ((prev_var) = QTAILQ_PREV(var, field), 1);        \
> >                (var) = (prev_var))
> >   
> > +#define QTAILQ_FOREACH_FUNC_SAFE(head, field, func) do {                \
> > +    typeof(*QTAILQ_FIRST(head)) *qffs_var, *qffs_next_var;              \
> > +    QTAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE(qffs_var, (head), field, qffs_next_var) {       \
> > +        (func)(qffs_var);                                               \
> > +    }                                                                   \
> > +} while (/*CONSTCOND*/0)
> > +
> >   /*
> >    * Tail queue access methods.
> >    */
>
> I wonder whether these are worth having.  Can you show the difference
> they make in the next patch?

Not big difference, so I can easily drop them. But I think it's a good idea and 
can be reused.. Why don't you like it?

--
Best regards,
Vladimir