The use of "rcu_assign_pointer()" is NULLing out the pointer.
According to RCU_INIT_POINTER()'s block comment:
"1. This use of RCU_INIT_POINTER() is NULLing out the pointer"
it is better to use it instead of rcu_assign_pointer() because it has a
smaller overhead.
The following Coccinelle semantic patch was used:
@@
@@
- rcu_assign_pointer
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER
(..., NULL)
Signed-off-by: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <bernat.ada@xxxxxxxxx>
---
net/mac80211/scan.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/scan.c b/net/mac80211/scan.c
index f40661e..6c69d09 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/scan.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/scan.c
@@ -1058,7 +1058,7 @@ int ieee80211_request_sched_scan_stop(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata)
if (rcu_access_pointer(local->sched_scan_sdata)) {
ret = drv_sched_scan_stop(local, sdata);
if (!ret)
- rcu_assign_pointer(local->sched_scan_sdata, NULL);
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(local->sched_scan_sdata, NULL);
}
out:
mutex_unlock(&local->mtx);
--
1.9.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
