From 41a2901e7d220875752a8c870e0b53288a578c20 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 15:56:35 -0700 Subject: rcu: Remove SPARSE_RCU_POINTER Kconfig option The sparse-based checking for non-RCU accesses to RCU-protected pointers has been around for a very long time, and it is now the only type of sparse-based checking that is optional. This commit therefore makes it unconditional. Reported-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Fengguang Wu --- Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html | 9 +++------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html') diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html index 8c94fc1d1c84..0e6550a8c926 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html @@ -559,9 +559,7 @@ The rcu_access_pointer() on line 6 is similar to For remove_gp_synchronous(), as long as all modifications to gp are carried out while holding gp_lock, the above optimizations are harmless. - However, - with CONFIG_SPARSE_RCU_POINTER=y, - sparse will complain if you + However, sparse will complain if you define gp with __rcu and then access it without using either rcu_access_pointer() or rcu_dereference(). @@ -1978,9 +1976,8 @@ guard against mishaps and misuse: and rcu_dereference(), perhaps (incorrectly) substituting a simple assignment. To catch this sort of error, a given RCU-protected pointer may be - tagged with __rcu, after which running sparse - with CONFIG_SPARSE_RCU_POINTER=y will complain - about simple-assignment accesses to that pointer. + tagged with __rcu, after which sparse + will complain about simple-assignment accesses to that pointer. Arnd Bergmann made me aware of this requirement, and also supplied the needed patch series. -- cgit v1.2.3