It is always safe to use RCU_INIT_POINTER to NULL a pointer. This results in slightly smaller/faster code. The following semantic patch used: <smpl> @@ @@ - rcu_assign_pointer + RCU_INIT_POINTER (..., NULL) </smpl> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakreyaz@xxxxxxxxx> --- fs/file.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c index 1fbc5c0..e027b33 100644 --- a/fs/file.c +++ b/fs/file.c @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@ repeat: /* Sanity check */ if (rcu_access_pointer(fdt->fd[fd]) != NULL) { printk(KERN_WARNING "alloc_fd: slot %d not NULL!\n", fd); - rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); } #endif @@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ int __close_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd) file = fdt->fd[fd]; if (!file) goto out_unlock; - rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); __clear_close_on_exec(fd, fdt); __put_unused_fd(files, fd); spin_unlock(&files->file_lock); @@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ void do_close_on_exec(struct files_struct *files) file = fdt->fd[fd]; if (!file) continue; - rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); __put_unused_fd(files, fd); spin_unlock(&files->file_lock); filp_close(file, files); -- 1.9.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html