Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Protected by something that the caller did, be it holding the the correct > lock, operating on it during initialization before other CPUs have access > to it, operating on it during cleanup after other CPUs' access has been > revoked, or whatever. But the point I made very early this morning still stands: What if someone simply wants to test the pointer, not actually to dereference it? NFS was using rcu_dereference() for this in a couple of places - which is overkill. I suggested stripping this off and you countered with the suggestion that it should be using rcu_dereference_check(). Why do I need anything at all? David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
