call_rcu_bh is now implemented in terms of call_rcu, so the suggestion
to use a different API for speed benefits is not accurate anymore.
Update the document accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <j...@joelfernandes.org>
---
Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 6 +-----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
index 8860ab2a897a..cc22ce49618d 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
@@ -285,11 +285,7 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are
always welcome!
here is that superuser already has lots of ways to crash
the machine.
- d. Use call_rcu_bh() rather than call_rcu(), in order to take
- advantage of call_rcu_bh()'s faster grace periods. (This
- is only a partial solution, though.)
-
- e. Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited
+ d. Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited
number of updates per grace period.
The same cautions apply to call_rcu_bh(), call_rcu_sched(),
--
2.19.0.605.g01d371f741-goog
