On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:57 AM Vlad Buslov <vla...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > On Mon 25 Feb 2019 at 22:39, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:11 AM Vlad Buslov <vla...@mellanox.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Fri 22 Feb 2019 at 19:32, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > So if it is no longer RCU any more, why do you still use > >> > rcu_dereference_protected()? That is, why not just deref it as a raw > >> > pointer? > > > > > > Any answer for this question? > > I decided that since there is neither possibility of concurrent pointer > assignment nor deallocation of object that it points to, most performant > solution would be using rcu_dereference_protected() which is the only > RCU dereference helper that doesn't use READ_ONCE. I now understand that > this is confusing (and most likely doesn't provide any noticeable > performance improvement anyway!) and will change this patch to use > rcu_dereference_raw() as you suggest.
Yeah, please make sure sparse is happy with that. :)
