[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1429266816-27004-1-git-send-email-milos@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:33:36 +0200
From: Milos Vyletel <milos@...hat.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org (open list:READ-COPY UPDATE...),
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org (open list:DOCUMENTATION)
Cc: jeff.haran@...rix.com, Milos Vyletel <milos@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] rcu: small rcu_dereference doc update
Make a note stating that repeated calls of rcu_dereference() may not
return the same pointer if update happens while in critical section.
Reported-by: Jeff Haran <jeff.haran@...rix.com>
Signed-off-by: Milos Vyletel <milos@...hat.com>
---
Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
index 88dfce1..82b1b2c 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
@@ -256,7 +256,9 @@ rcu_dereference()
If you are going to be fetching multiple fields from the
RCU-protected structure, using the local variable is of
course preferred. Repeated rcu_dereference() calls look
- ugly and incur unnecessary overhead on Alpha CPUs.
+ ugly, do not guarantee that same pointer will be returned
+ if update happened while in critical section and incur
+ unnecessary overhead on Alpha CPUs.
Note that the value returned by rcu_dereference() is valid
only within the enclosing RCU read-side critical section.
--
2.1.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists