From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: "Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: mojha@codeaurora.org, jkosina@suse.cz, cezary.rojewski@intel.com,
neilb@suse.com, b00073877@aus.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] list: add more extensive double add check
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 18:08:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBgnY8FXpHJdoDos@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210201135251.1884-1-christian.koenig@amd.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 02:52:51PM +0100, Christian König wrote:
> Adding the same element to a linked list multiple times
> seems to be a rather common programming mistake. To debug
> those I've more than once written some code to check a
> linked list for duplicates.
>
> Since re-inventing the wheel over and over again is a bad
> idea this patch tries to add some common code which allows
> to check linked lists for duplicates while adding new
> elements.
>
> When list debugging is enabled we currently already check
> the previous and next element if they are identical to the
> new one. This patch now adds a configuration option to
> check N elements before and after the desired position.
>
> By default we still only test one item since testing more
> means quite a large CPU overhead. This can be overwritten
> on a per C file bases by defining DEBUG_LIST_DOUBLE_ADD
> before including list.h.
I'm not sure it is a good idea. Currently the implementation is *generic*.
You are customizing it w/o letting caller know.
Create a derivative implementation and name it exlist (exclusive list) and use
whenever it makes sense.
And I think if you are still pushing to modify generic one the default must be
0 in order not altering current behaviour.
> A new kunit test is also added to the existing list tests
> which intentionally triggers the debug functionality.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-01 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-01 13:52 Christian König
2021-02-01 16:08 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2021-02-01 16:09 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-02-01 22:16 ` NeilBrown
2021-02-02 12:59 ` Christian König
2021-02-04 7:25 ` [list] b9dc2e0952: WARNING:at_lib/list_debug.c:#__list_add_valid kernel test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YBgnY8FXpHJdoDos@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=b00073877@aus.edu \
--cc=cezary.rojewski@intel.com \
--cc=ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mojha@codeaurora.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®