From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in
 nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() [ver #2]
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:16:04 -0700
Message-ID: <20100331151604.GC2461@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20100319022527.GC2894@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20100318133302.29754.1584.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <19192.1269889348@redhat.com>
 <23274.1269893706@redhat.com>
 <25276.1269901350@redhat.com>
 <26760.1269903543@redhat.com>
 <20100329232636.GT2569@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <2440.1269967151@redhat.com>
 <21972.1269993064@redhat.com>
 <10818.1270044273@redhat.com>
Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:55785 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752545Ab0CaPRK (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:17:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <10818.1270044273@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:04:33PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > How about Eric's suggestion of rcu_dereference_protected()?  That name
> > doesn't imply a lock, which as you say above, isn't always needed to
> > keep the structure from changing.
> 
> But 'protected' from what or by what?

Protected by something that the caller did, be it holding the the correct
lock, operating on it during initialization before other CPUs have access
to it, operating on it during cleanup after other CPUs' access has been
revoked, or whatever.

							Thanx, Paul