The use of "rcu_assign_pointer()" is NULLing out the pointer. According to RCU_INIT_POINTER()'s block comment: "1. This use of RCU_INIT_POINTER() is NULLing out the pointer" it is better to use it instead of rcu_assign_pointer() because it has a smaller overhead.
The following Coccinelle semantic patch was used: @@ @@ - rcu_assign_pointer + RCU_INIT_POINTER (..., NULL) Signed-off-by: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <[email protected]> --- fs/afs/security.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/afs/security.c b/fs/afs/security.c index 8d01042..42f7cf3 100644 --- a/fs/afs/security.c +++ b/fs/afs/security.c @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ void afs_clear_permits(struct afs_vnode *vnode) mutex_lock(&vnode->permits_lock); permits = vnode->permits; - rcu_assign_pointer(vnode->permits, NULL); + RCU_INIT_POINTER(vnode->permits, NULL); mutex_unlock(&vnode->permits_lock); if (permits) -- 1.9.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
