On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 08:51:00AM +0200, Christian König wrote: > On 5/19/26 08:05, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > > Use LIST_HEAD to initialize on stack list head. No intentional > > functional impact. > > > > Change generated with below coccinelle script: > > > > @@ > > identifier name; > > @@ > > - struct list_head name; > > + LIST_HEAD(name); > > ... when != name > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&name); > > The patch itself looks correct, but my question is why would we want to do > that?
The benefit is: simpler code, combine the linked list defintion and initialization in one step, thus 1 LoC vs 2 LoCs; And potential bug prevention, e.g use the list before intialized. But I agree, no strong benefit here. > > Initializing the list head (or any other result variable) directly before it > is filled in is usually good practice. > > Regards, > Christian. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c > > b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c > > index 03c2b87cb111..6f8b7138ff56 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c > > @@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ static struct dma_buf *system_heap_allocate(struct > > dma_heap *heap, > > struct dma_buf *dmabuf; > > struct sg_table *table; > > struct scatterlist *sg; > > - struct list_head pages; > > + LIST_HEAD(pages); > > struct page *page, *tmp_page; > > int i, ret = -ENOMEM; > > > > @@ -423,7 +423,6 @@ static struct dma_buf *system_heap_allocate(struct > > dma_heap *heap, > > buffer->len = len; > > buffer->cc_shared = cc_shared; > > > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pages); > > i = 0; > > while (size_remaining > 0) { > > /* > > -- > > 2.53.0 > > >
