The use of "rcu_assign_pointer()" is NULLing out the pointer.
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....@gmail.com>
---
block/blk-cgroup.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
index 069bc20..9a95b3f 100644
--- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
+++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
@@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ static void blkg_destroy(struct blkcg_gq *blkg)
* will. Hint assignment itself can race safely.
*/
if (rcu_access_pointer(blkcg->blkg_hint) == blkg)
- rcu_assign_pointer(blkcg->blkg_hint, NULL);
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(blkcg->blkg_hint, NULL);
/*
* If root blkg is destroyed. Just clear the pointer since root_rl
--
1.9.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
