From 1d7e4ebf291d3103466006926329e39aa355944f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andreea-Cristina Bernat Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:27:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] afs: inode: Replace rcu_assign_pointer() with RCU_INIT_POINTER() 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 Signed-off-by: David Howells --- fs/afs/inode.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/afs/inode.c b/fs/afs/inode.c index ade6ec3873cf..e083e086b7ca 100644 --- a/fs/afs/inode.c +++ b/fs/afs/inode.c @@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ void afs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) mutex_lock(&vnode->permits_lock); permits = vnode->permits; - rcu_assign_pointer(vnode->permits, NULL); + RCU_INIT_POINTER(vnode->permits, NULL); mutex_unlock(&vnode->permits_lock); if (permits) call_rcu(&permits->rcu, afs_zap_permits); -- 2.30.2