[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20221227195659.2876-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2022 19:56:59 +0000
From: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com, paulmck@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_reporting: replace rcu_access_pointer() with rcu_dereference_protected()
On Tue, 27 Dec 2022 19:55:09 +0000 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 07:21:58PM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > +++ b/mm/page_reporting.c
> > @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ int page_reporting_register(struct page_reporting_dev_info *prdev)
> > mutex_lock(&page_reporting_mutex);
> >
> > /* nothing to do if already in use */
> > - if (rcu_access_pointer(pr_dev_info)) {
> > + if (rcu_dereference_protected(pr_dev_info, true)) {
>
> Pretty sure that passing a bare 'true' is an antipattern.
> Instead, document _what_ lock protects us, ie:
>
> if (rcu_dereference_protected(pr_dev_info,
> lockdep_is_held(&page_reporting_mutex))) {
>
> Obviously, we took it just one line up, but if code moves around, it
> may save us.
Good point, agreed. Will do so in the next version.
Thanks,
SJ
Powered by blists - more mailing lists