lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] percpu-refcount: implement percpu_ref_reinit() and percpu_ref_is_zero()
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 03:06:00PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:05:49AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > If you mean what I think you mean by load_acquire_depends(), it is spelled
> > "rcu_dereference()" or, in this case, where you are never removing anything
> > that has been added, "rcu_dereference_raw()". Because you are never
> > removing anything, you don't need rcu_read_lock() or rcu_read_unlock(),
> > thus you don't want lockdep yelling at you about not having RCU read-side
> > critical sections, thus rcu_dereference_raw().
>
> Yeah, along that line but it's kinda weird to use rcu_dereference()
> when RCU isn't involved. It'd be clearer to have something like
> load_acquire_depends() and then define RCU deref in terms of it.
>
> This is purely notational and clarifiying in the documentation is
> probably enough.

OK. If there end up being too many non-RCU uses of rcu_dereference_raw(),
then it might make sense to create a new primitive. But it is not like
we have any shortage of them just now. ;-)

Thanx, Paul



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-20 03:41    [W:0.097 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site