[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160502180644.GF3512@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 11:06:44 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakreyaz@...il.com>,
"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
target-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] target: use RCU_INIT_POINTER() when NULLing.
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:59:50AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:57:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > -#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) smp_store_release(&p, RCU_INITIALIZER(v))
> > +#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) \
> > +({ \
> > + uintptr_t _r_a_p__v = (uintptr_t)(v); \
> > + \
> > + if (__builtin_constant_p(v) && (_r_a_p__v) == (uintptr_t)NULL) \
> > + WRITE_ONCE((p), (typeof(p))(_r_a_p__v)); \
> > + else \
> > + smp_store_release(&p, RCU_INITIALIZER((typeof(p))_r_a_p__v)); \
> > + _r_a_p__v; \
> > +})
>
> Can't we turn it into an inline (would need different calling
> conventions for p, though).
And for v. But how do I do that without C++ templates?
Also, does __builtin_constant_p() work reliably on a parameter?
Especially when the compiler decides not to do the inlining?
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists