On Sat, 25 May 2019 04:14:44 -0400 Joel Fernandes <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I guess the difference between the _raw_notrace and just _raw variants > > is that _notrace ones do a rcu_check_sparse(). Don't we want to keep > > that check? > > This is true. > > Since the users of _raw_notrace are very few, is it worth keeping this API > just for sparse checking? The API naming is also confusing. I was expecting > _raw_notrace to do fewer checks than _raw, instead of more. Honestly, I just > want to nuke _raw_notrace as done in this series and later we can introduce a > sparse checking version of _raw if need-be. The other option could be to > always do sparse checking for _raw however that used to be the case and got > changed in http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-afs/2016-July/001016.html What if we just rename _raw to _raw_nocheck, and _raw_notrace to _raw ? -- Steve
