From: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> we do have an RCU-delayed part there already (freeing the wq), so it's not like the pipe situation; moreover, it might be worth considering coallocating wq with the rest of struct sock_alloc. ->sk_wq in struct sock would remain a pointer as it is, but the object it normally points to would be coallocated with struct socket...
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> --- net/socket.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/socket.c b/net/socket.c index 8255f5bda0aa..6953a049fb82 100644 --- a/net/socket.c +++ b/net/socket.c @@ -263,12 +263,12 @@ static struct inode *sock_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb) return &ei->vfs_inode; } -static void sock_destroy_inode(struct inode *inode) +static void sock_free_inode(struct inode *inode) { struct socket_alloc *ei; ei = container_of(inode, struct socket_alloc, vfs_inode); - kfree_rcu(ei->socket.wq, rcu); + kfree(ei->socket.wq); kmem_cache_free(sock_inode_cachep, ei); } @@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ static void init_inodecache(void) static const struct super_operations sockfs_ops = { .alloc_inode = sock_alloc_inode, - .destroy_inode = sock_destroy_inode, + .free_inode = sock_free_inode, .statfs = simple_statfs, }; -- 2.11.0