Commit c7bc7e9
ACPI: APEI: Remove redundant rcu_read_lock/unlock() under spinlock
Since commit a8bb74a ("rcu: Consolidate RCU-sched update-side
function definitions") there is no difference between rcu_read_lock(),
rcu_read_lock_bh() and rcu_read_lock_sched() in terms of RCU read
section and the relevant grace period. That means that spin_lock(),
which implies rcu_read_lock_sched(), also implies rcu_read_lock().
There is no need no explicitly start a RCU read section if one has
already been started implicitly by spin_lock().
Simplify the code and remove the inner rcu_read_lock() invocation.
Signed-off-by: pengdonglin <pengdonglin@xiaomi.com>
Signed-off-by: pengdonglin <dolinux.peng@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250916044735.2316171-2-dolinux.peng@gmail.com
[ rjw: Subject adjustment ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>1 parent 7d444f5 commit c7bc7e9
1 file changed
Lines changed: 0 additions & 2 deletions
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
1207 | 1207 | | |
1208 | 1208 | | |
1209 | 1209 | | |
1210 | | - | |
1211 | 1210 | | |
1212 | 1211 | | |
1213 | 1212 | | |
1214 | 1213 | | |
1215 | | - | |
1216 | 1214 | | |
1217 | 1215 | | |
1218 | 1216 | | |
| |||
0 commit comments