Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Remove some notrace RCU APIs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux