[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140701114138.GQ6758@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 13:41:38 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rcu: uninline rcu_lock_acquire() and
rcu_lock_release()
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 06:18:49PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> +static inline void __rcu_lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *map, unsigned long ip)
> {
> + lock_acquire(map, 0, 0, 2, 0, NULL, ip);
> }
> +extern void rcu_lock_acquire(void);
> +extern void rcu_lock_release(void);
> +extern void rcu_lock_acquire_bh(void);
> +extern void rcu_lock_release_bh(void);
> +extern void rcu_lock_acquire_sched(void);
> +extern void rcu_lock_release_sched(void);
> diff --git a/include/linux/srcu.h b/include/linux/srcu.h
> index a2783cb..5c06289 100644
> --- a/include/linux/srcu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/srcu.h
> @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock(struct srcu_struct *sp) __acquires(sp)
> {
> int retval = __srcu_read_lock(sp);
>
> - rcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map);
> + __rcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map, _THIS_IP_);
> return retval;
> }
Would an srcu_lock_acquire() not make sense here?
In any case, not wrong per se, just a consistency thing that stood out.
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists