[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1492471738-1377-6-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:28:53 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 06/11] hlist_add_tail_rcu disable sparse warning
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
sparse is unhappy about this code in hlist_add_tail_rcu:
struct hlist_node *i, *last = NULL;
for (i = hlist_first_rcu(h); i; i = hlist_next_rcu(i))
last = i;
This is because hlist_next_rcu and hlist_next_rcu return
__rcu pointers.
It's a false positive - it's a write side primitive and so
does not need to be called in a read side critical section.
The following trivial patch disables the warning
without changing the behaviour in any way.
Note: __hlist_for_each_rcu would also remove the warning but it would be
confusing since it calls rcu_derefence and is designed to run in the rcu
read side critical section.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
include/linux/rculist.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rculist.h b/include/linux/rculist.h
index 4f7a9561b8c4..b1fd8bf85fdc 100644
--- a/include/linux/rculist.h
+++ b/include/linux/rculist.h
@@ -509,7 +509,8 @@ static inline void hlist_add_tail_rcu(struct hlist_node *n,
{
struct hlist_node *i, *last = NULL;
- for (i = hlist_first_rcu(h); i; i = hlist_next_rcu(i))
+ /* Note: write side code, so rcu accessors are not needed. */
+ for (i = h->first; i; i = i->next)
last = i;
if (last) {
--
2.5.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists