On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 04:04:17PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 08:21 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > /*
> > * init_rcu_head_on_stack()/destroy_rcu_head_on_stack() are needed for dynamic
> > * initialization and destruction of rcu_head on the stack. rcu_head structures
> > * allocated dynamically in the heap or defined statically don't need any
> > * initialization.
> > */
> >
> > The commit that introduced init_rcu_head is
> > 546a9d8519ed137b2804a3f5a3659003039dd49c which suggests it exists only
> > to help the slab allocators, although curiously the allocators never
> > call it these days..
> >
> > Maybe Paul can confirm?
>
> It would be great if Paul could provide feedback. The comment in
> include/linux/rcupdate.h seems to contradict the following paragraph from
> Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html for statically
> allocated objects:
>
> The corresponding <tt>rcu_head</tt> structures that are
> dynamically allocated are automatically tracked, but
> <tt>rcu_head</tt> structures allocated on the stack
> must be initialized with <tt>init_rcu_head_on_stack()</tt>
> and cleaned up with <tt>destroy_rcu_head_on_stack()</tt>.
> Similarly, statically allocated non-stack <tt>rcu_head</tt>
> structures must be initialized with <tt>init_rcu_head()</tt>
> and cleaned up with <tt>destroy_rcu_head()</tt>.
Right, I missed it.
So how are we going to solve that rdma/for-next doesn't compile?
Thanks
>
> Bart.N?????r??y????b?X??ǧv?^?){.n?+????{??ٚ?{ay? ʇڙ?,j??f???h???z? ?w??? ???j:+v???w?j?m????????zZ+?????ݢj"??!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
