Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [tipc-discussion] [PATCH net/tipc] Replace rcu_swap_protected() with rcu_replace_pointer() | From | Ying Xue <> | Date | Wed, 11 Dec 2019 12:42:00 +0800 |
| |
On 12/11/19 10:00 AM, Tuong Lien Tong wrote: >> >> /* Move passive key if any */ >> if (key.passive) { >> - tipc_aead_rcu_swap(rx->aead[key.passive], tmp2, &rx->lock); >> + tmp2 = rcu_replace_pointer(rx->aead[key.passive], tmp2, > &rx->lock); > The 3rd parameter should be the lockdep condition checking instead of the > spinlock's pointer i.e. "lockdep_is_held(&rx->lock)"? > That's why I'd prefer to use the 'tipc_aead_rcu_swap ()' macro, which is > clear & concise at least for the context here. It might be re-used later as > well... >
Right. The 3rd parameter of rcu_replace_pointer() should be "lockdep_is_held(&rx->lock)" instead of "&rx->lock".
| |