Обсуждение: Cleanup: PGProc->links doesn't need to be the first field anymore
pgproc.h has this:
> struct PGPROC
> {
> /* proc->links MUST BE FIRST IN STRUCT (see ProcSleep,ProcWakeup,etc) */
> dlist_node links; /* list link if process is in a list */
> dlist_head *procgloballist; /* procglobal list that owns this PGPROC */
> ...
I don't see any particular reason for 'links' to be the first field. We
used to do things like "proc = (PGPROC *) waitQueue->links.next", but
since commit 5764f611e1, this has been a "dlist", and dlist_container()
can handle the list link being anywhere in the struct.
I tried moving it and ran the regression tests. That revealed one place
where we still don't use dlist_container:
> if (!dlist_is_empty(procgloballist))
> {
> MyProc = (PGPROC *) dlist_pop_head_node(procgloballist);
> ...
I believe that was just an oversight. Trivial patch attached.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
Вложения
Hi Heikki,
> I tried moving it and ran the regression tests. That revealed one place
> where we still don't use dlist_container:
>
> > if (!dlist_is_empty(procgloballist))
> > {
> > MyProc = (PGPROC *) dlist_pop_head_node(procgloballist);
> > ...
>
> I believe that was just an oversight. Trivial patch attached.
I tested your patch. LGTM.
PGPROC is exposed to third-party code, but since we don't change the
structure this time, the extensions will not be affected.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
Hi,
On 2024-07-04 01:54:18 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> pgproc.h has this:
>
> > struct PGPROC
> > {
> > /* proc->links MUST BE FIRST IN STRUCT (see ProcSleep,ProcWakeup,etc) */
> > dlist_node links; /* list link if process is in a list */
> > dlist_head *procgloballist; /* procglobal list that owns this PGPROC */
> > ...
>
> I don't see any particular reason for 'links' to be the first field. We used
> to do things like "proc = (PGPROC *) waitQueue->links.next", but since
> commit 5764f611e1, this has been a "dlist", and dlist_container() can handle
> the list link being anywhere in the struct.
Indeed.
> I tried moving it and ran the regression tests. That revealed one place
> where we still don't use dlist_container:
>
> > if (!dlist_is_empty(procgloballist))
> > {
> > MyProc = (PGPROC *) dlist_pop_head_node(procgloballist);
> > ...
>
> I believe that was just an oversight. Trivial patch attached.
Oops. Yes, I clearly should have used dlist_container() here.
+1
Greetings,
Andres Freund
On 04/07/2024 23:20, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2024-07-04 01:54:18 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> I believe that was just an oversight. Trivial patch attached. > > Oops. Yes, I clearly should have used dlist_container() here. Committed, thanks. -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)