Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Jul 2014 13:41:38 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rcu: uninline rcu_lock_acquire() and rcu_lock_release() |
| |
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 06:18:49PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > +static inline void __rcu_lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *map, unsigned long ip) > { > + lock_acquire(map, 0, 0, 2, 0, NULL, ip); > }
> +extern void rcu_lock_acquire(void); > +extern void rcu_lock_release(void); > +extern void rcu_lock_acquire_bh(void); > +extern void rcu_lock_release_bh(void); > +extern void rcu_lock_acquire_sched(void); > +extern void rcu_lock_release_sched(void);
> diff --git a/include/linux/srcu.h b/include/linux/srcu.h > index a2783cb..5c06289 100644 > --- a/include/linux/srcu.h > +++ b/include/linux/srcu.h > @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock(struct srcu_struct *sp) __acquires(sp) > { > int retval = __srcu_read_lock(sp); > > - rcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map); > + __rcu_lock_acquire(&(sp)->dep_map, _THIS_IP_); > return retval; > }
Would an srcu_lock_acquire() not make sense here?
In any case, not wrong per se, just a consistency thing that stood out. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |