[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201109122424.GN2594@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 13:24:24 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: paulmck@...nel.org
Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org, Hui Su <sh_def@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/4] docs/rcu: Update the call_rcu() API
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 03:05:10PM -0800, paulmck@...nel.org wrote:
> From: Hui Su <sh_def@....com>
>
> This commit updates the documented API of call_rcu() to use the
> rcu_callback_t typedef instead of the open-coded function definition.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hui Su <sh_def@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> ---
> Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
> index fb3ff76..1a4723f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
> @@ -497,8 +497,7 @@ long -- there might be other high-priority work to be done.
> In such cases, one uses call_rcu() rather than synchronize_rcu().
> The call_rcu() API is as follows::
>
> - void call_rcu(struct rcu_head * head,
> - void (*func)(struct rcu_head *head));
> + void call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func);
Personally I much prefer the old form, because now I have to go look up
rcu_callback_t to figure out wtf kind of signature is actually required.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists