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-ioc.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-ioc.c b/block/blk-ioc.c
index 1a27f45..c024a77 100644
--- a/block/blk-ioc.c
+++ b/block/blk-ioc.c
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ static void ioc_destroy_icq(struct io_cq *icq)
* will. Hint assignment itself can race safely.
*/
if (rcu_access_pointer(ioc->icq_hint) == icq)
- rcu_assign_pointer(ioc->icq_hint, NULL);
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(ioc->icq_hint, NULL);
ioc_exit_icq(icq);
--
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/
