Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/20] rbtree: add const qualifier to some functions

[Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 17.06.17 at 11:32, <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The 'rb_first()', 'rb_last()', 'rb_next()' and 'rb_prev()' calls
>> take a pointer to an RB node or RB root. They do not change the
>> pointed objects, so add a 'const' qualifier in order to make life
>> of the users of these functions easier.
>>
>> Indeed, if I have my own constant pointer &const struct my_type *p,
>> and I call 'rb_next(&p->rb)', I get a GCC warning:
>>
>> warning: passing argument 1 of ‘rb_next’ discards qualifiers from pointer 
>> target
>> type
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> [Linux commit f4b477c47332367d35686bd2b808c2156b96d7c7]
>>
>> Ported to Xen.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> This looks okay now from a content pov, but I still have a question
> and a remark.
>
> Question: Who's the original author? According to the Linux commit,
> it's Artem, but without an explicit From: tag I think anyone trying to
> "git am" you mail would put you in as the author. With this taken
> care of (which the committer may be willing to do)
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>

Thanks for your input.
Pardon me, I am new to the forum. The Ack you added is only for this patch.

Also, do you want me to add 'From' and resend ?
To be precise in below order  :

Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[Linux commit f4b477c47332367d35686bd2b808c2156b96d7c7]

Ported to Xen.

From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>

Please do correct me if my understanding is wrong. Thanks.

> Remark: You've sent v3 of the series. This patch has no version
> indicator at all, and most other patches say v2. This is all quite
> inconsistent, and prevents easily identifying the various pieces
> belonging together when not using a threaded view. If you add
> new patches to a series, don't start them at v1. Instead in the
> brief revision info (after the first --- marker) simply say "New in
> v3."
>

Sure, my mistake. I was not aware of the same. I will take care in
future patches.
Thanks for your input.

Regards,

~Praveen.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel