call_rcu_bh is now implemented in terms of call_rcu, so the suggestion to use a different API for speed benefits is not accurate anymore. Update the document accordingly. Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt index 8860ab2a897a..cc22ce49618d 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt +++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt @@ -285,11 +285,7 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome! here is that superuser already has lots of ways to crash the machine. - d. Use call_rcu_bh() rather than call_rcu(), in order to take - advantage of call_rcu_bh()'s faster grace periods. (This - is only a partial solution, though.) - - e. Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited + d. Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited number of updates per grace period. The same cautions apply to call_rcu_bh(), call_rcu_sched(), -- 2.19.0.605.g01d371f741-goog
