On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 11:07:55PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 03:01:36PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:58 PM Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 07:49:38PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Assuming this is safe, you can use RCU_INIT_POINTER() here because
> > > > you're
> > > > storing NULL, so you don't need the wmb() before storing the pointer.
> > >
> > > fs/file.c:pick_file() would make more interesting target for the same
> > > treatment...
> >
> > Actually, don't.
> >
> > rcu_assign_pointer() itself already does the optimization for the case
> > of a constant NULL pointer assignment.
> >
> > So there's no need to manually change things to RCU_INIT_POINTER().
>
> I missed that, and the documentation wasn't updated by
> 3a37f7275cda5ad25c1fe9be8f20c76c60d175fa.
Can't trust the author of that patch! ;-)
> Paul, how about this?
>
> +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.rst
> @@ -1668,8 +1668,10 @@ against mishaps and misuse:
> this purpose.
> #. It is not necessary to use rcu_assign_pointer() when creating
> linked structures that are to be published via a single external
> - pointer. The RCU_INIT_POINTER() macro is provided for this task
> - and also for assigning ``NULL`` pointers at runtime.
> + pointer. The RCU_INIT_POINTER() macro is provided for this task.
> + It used to be more efficient to use RCU_INIT_POINTER() to store a
> + ``NULL`` pointer, but rcu_assign_pointer() now optimises for a constant
> + ``NULL`` pointer itself.
>
> This not a hard-and-fast list: RCU's diagnostic capabilities will
> continue to be guided by the number and type of usage bugs found in
Looks good to me! If you send a complete patch, I will be happy to pull
it in.
Thanx, Paul
