[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body as a ptr

[Jakob Koschel]

> On 28. Feb 2022, at 12:20, Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:18PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
>> If the list does not contain the expected element, the value of
>> list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a valid structure.
>> To avoid type confusion in such case, the list iterator
>> scope will be limited to list_for_each_entry() loop.
>> 
>> In preparation to limiting scope of a list iterator to the list traversal
>> loop, use a dedicated pointer to point to the found element.
>> Determining if an element was found is then simply checking if
>> the pointer is != NULL.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel at gmail.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.c       |  6 +++--
>> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c    | 17 ++++++++-----
>> drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c       | 38 ++++++++++++++++++----------
>> drivers/usb/gadget/configfs.c        | 22 ++++++++++------
>> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/max3420_udc.c | 11 +++++---
>> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/tegra-xudc.c  | 11 +++++---
>> drivers/usb/mtu3/mtu3_gadget.c       | 11 +++++---
>> drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c       | 11 +++++---
>> drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c        | 11 +++++---
>> 9 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
> 
> The drivers/usb/ portion of this patch should be in patch 1/X, right?

I kept them separate since it's a slightly different case.
Using 'ptr' instead of '&ptr->other_member'. Regardless, I'll split
this commit up as you mentioned.

> 
> Also, you will have to split these up per-subsystem so that the
> different subsystem maintainers can take these in their trees.

Thanks for the feedback.
To clarify I understand you correctly:
I should do one patch set per-subsystem with every instance/(file?)
fixed as a separate commit?

If I understand correctly, I'll repost accordingly.

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

thanks,
Jakob Koschel