From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> When using "guard(rcu)();" sparse will complain, because even though it now understands the cleanup attribute, it doesn't evaluate the calls from it at function exit, and thus doesn't count the context correctly. Given that there's a conditional in the resulting code: static inline void class_rcu_destructor(class_rcu_t *_T) { if (_T->lock) { rcu_read_unlock(); } } it seems that even trying to teach sparse to evalulate the cleanup attribute function it'd still be difficult to really make it understand the full context here. Suppress the sparse warning by just releasing the context in the acquisition part of the function, after all we know it's safe with the guard, that's the whole point of it. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> --- include/linux/rcupdate.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h index 17d7ed5f3ae6..41081ee9c9a7 100644 --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h @@ -1090,6 +1090,6 @@ rcu_head_after_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *rhp, rcu_callback_t f) extern int rcu_expedited; extern int rcu_normal; -DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(rcu, rcu_read_lock(), rcu_read_unlock()) +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(rcu, do { rcu_read_lock(); __release(RCU); } while(0), rcu_read_unlock()) #endif /* __LINUX_RCUPDATE_H */ -- 2.44.0