From: Vasu Dev <vasu.dev-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
To: Andreea-Cristina Bernat
<bernat.ada-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
JBottomley-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org,
fcoe-devel-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org,
paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfs: Replace rcu_assign_pointer() with RCU_INIT_POINTER()
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 15:01:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1411682471.2856.3.camel@vfc0> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140818145622.GA14281@ada>
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 17:56 +0300, Andreea-Cristina Bernat wrote:
> The uses of "rcu_assign_pointer()" are NULLing out the pointers.
> According to RCU_INIT_POINTER()'s block comment:
> "1. This use of RCU_INIT_POINTER() is NULLing out the pointer"
> it is better to use it instead of rcu_assign_pointer() because it has a
> smaller overhead.
>
> The following Coccinelle semantic patch was used:
> @@
> @@
>
> - rcu_assign_pointer
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER
> (..., NULL)
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <bernat.ada-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> index 8d65a51a..c11a638 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> @@ -296,9 +296,9 @@ void fc_fc4_deregister_provider(enum fc_fh_type type, struct fc4_prov *prov)
> BUG_ON(type >= FC_FC4_PROV_SIZE);
> mutex_lock(&fc_prov_mutex);
> if (prov->recv)
> - rcu_assign_pointer(fc_passive_prov[type], NULL);
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fc_passive_prov[type], NULL);
> else
> - rcu_assign_pointer(fc_active_prov[type], NULL);
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fc_active_prov[type], NULL);
> mutex_unlock(&fc_prov_mutex);
> synchronize_rcu();
> }
Looks like patch is not yet applied.
Acked-by: Vasu Dev <vasu.dev-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vasu Dev <vasu.dev@linux.intel.com>
To: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <bernat.ada@gmail.com>
Cc: robert.w.love@intel.com, JBottomley@parallels.com,
fcoe-devel@open-fcoe.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfs: Replace rcu_assign_pointer() with RCU_INIT_POINTER()
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 15:01:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1411682471.2856.3.camel@vfc0> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140818145622.GA14281@ada>
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 17:56 +0300, Andreea-Cristina Bernat wrote:
> The uses of "rcu_assign_pointer()" are NULLing out the pointers.
> According to RCU_INIT_POINTER()'s block comment:
> "1. This use of RCU_INIT_POINTER() is NULLing out the pointer"
> it is better to use it instead of rcu_assign_pointer() because it has a
> smaller overhead.
>
> The following Coccinelle semantic patch was used:
> @@
> @@
>
> - rcu_assign_pointer
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER
> (..., NULL)
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <bernat.ada@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> index 8d65a51a..c11a638 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_libfc.c
> @@ -296,9 +296,9 @@ void fc_fc4_deregister_provider(enum fc_fh_type type, struct fc4_prov *prov)
> BUG_ON(type >= FC_FC4_PROV_SIZE);
> mutex_lock(&fc_prov_mutex);
> if (prov->recv)
> - rcu_assign_pointer(fc_passive_prov[type], NULL);
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fc_passive_prov[type], NULL);
> else
> - rcu_assign_pointer(fc_active_prov[type], NULL);
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fc_active_prov[type], NULL);
> mutex_unlock(&fc_prov_mutex);
> synchronize_rcu();
> }
Looks like patch is not yet applied.
Acked-by: Vasu Dev <vasu.dev@intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-25 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-18 14:56 [PATCH] libfs: Replace rcu_assign_pointer() with RCU_INIT_POINTER() Andreea-Cristina Bernat
2014-09-25 22:01 ` Vasu Dev [this message]
2014-09-25 22:01 ` Vasu Dev
2014-09-30 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-30 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=1411682471.2856.3.camel@vfc0 \
--to=vasu.dev-vuqaysv1563yd54fqh9/ca@public.gmane.org \
--cc=JBottomley-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=bernat.ada-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=fcoe-devel-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.