Re: [PATCH -next v4] staging: fwserial: Switch to kfree_rcu() API

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

 




On 2022/9/19 18:27, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 05:43:33PM +0800, shangxiaojing wrote:
On 2022/9/19 17:11, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 05:10:56PM +0800, Shang XiaoJing wrote:
Instead of invoking a synchronize_rcu() to free a pointer after a grace
period, we can directly make use of a new API that does the same but in
a more efficient way.

Signed-off-by: Shang XiaoJing <shangxiaojing@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changelog:
v3: the first version of the PATCH
v1: v3 resent as v1
v2: use kfree_rcu() instead of kvfree_rcu() for clarity
v4: resend v2 as v4 to avoid versioning confusion
---
   drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c | 3 +--
   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c b/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c
index 81b06d88ed0d..8d2b4ed1f39e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c
@@ -2117,8 +2117,7 @@ static void fwserial_remove_peer(struct fwtty_peer *peer)
   	if (port)
   		fwserial_release_port(port, true);
-	synchronize_rcu();
-	kfree(peer);
+	kfree_rcu(peer);
The kfree_rcu(peer) should be kfree_rcu(peer, rcu), due to the rcu_head
member named rcu in fwtty_peer.
Oh, huh.  What happens if you don't pas the "rcu" parameter?  I see
there is a similar instance in ext4_apply_quota_options().

		kfree_rcu(qname);

In order to keep the code logic unchanged, "kfree_rcu(peer);" is better than "kfree_rcu(peer, rcu);"

I'm sorry for this repeated revision.


Thanks,

Shang XiaoJing





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Development]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux