lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 21/30] Update call_rcu() usage, add synchronize_rcu()
Date
Reported-by: Kyle Hubert <khubert@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl | 6 ++++--
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
index e6cc574..ed64d22 100644
--- a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
+++ b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
@@ -1645,7 +1645,9 @@ the amount of locking which needs to be done.
all the readers who were traversing the list when we deleted the
element are finished. We use <function>call_rcu()</function> to
register a callback which will actually destroy the object once
- the readers are finished.
+ all pre-existing readers are finished. Alternatively,
+ <function>synchronize_rcu()</function> may be used to block until
+ all pre-existing are finished.
</para>
<para>
But how does Read Copy Update know when the readers are
@@ -1714,7 +1716,7 @@ the amount of locking which needs to be done.
- object_put(obj);
+ list_del_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;list);
cache_num--;
-+ call_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;rcu, cache_delete_rcu, obj);
++ call_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;rcu, cache_delete_rcu);
}

/* Must be holding cache_lock */
--
1.7.0.6


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-07-14 22:17    [W:0.133 / U:1.640 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site