On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 23:00:42 -0400
John de la Garza <j...@jjdev.com> wrote:
> Since the callback is doing nothing more than calling kfree() we can
> use kfree_rcu() instead of having to use a callback.
>
> Signed-off-by: John de la Garza <j...@jjdev.com>
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 8 +-------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 26753ba..51deccd 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -250,12 +250,6 @@ void __destroy_inode(struct inode *inode)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__destroy_inode);
>
> -static void i_callback(struct rcu_head *head)
> -{
> - struct inode *inode = container_of(head, struct inode, i_rcu);
> - kmem_cache_free(inode_cachep, inode);
> -}
> -
> static void destroy_inode(struct inode *inode)
> {
> BUG_ON(!list_empty(&inode->i_lru));
> @@ -263,7 +257,7 @@ static void destroy_inode(struct inode *inode)
> if (inode->i_sb->s_op->destroy_inode)
> inode->i_sb->s_op->destroy_inode(inode);
> else
> - call_rcu(&inode->i_rcu, i_callback);
> + kfree(inode, i_rcu);
Your description says "use kfree_rcu()" but that is kfree(). This won't
even compile.
And as Al pointed out, kfree() is not the same as kmem_cache_free().
So you'd need to invent kmem_cache_free_rcu() also. Not sure that
would have any value elsewhere.
> }
>
> /**
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
