Re: [patch 8/9] Documentation: Fix invalid rcu assumptions

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 09:28:25PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 10 December 2009 00:53:26 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Index: linux-2.6-tip/Documentation/credentials.txt
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/Documentation/credentials.txt
> > +++ linux-2.6-tip/Documentation/credentials.txt
> > @@ -408,9 +408,6 @@ This should be used inside the RCU read 
> >                 ...
> >         }
> >  
> > -A function need not get RCU read lock to use __task_cred() if it is holding a
> > -spinlock at the time as this implicitly holds the RCU read lock.
> > -
> >  Should it be necessary to hold another task's credentials for a long period of
> >  time, and possibly to sleep whilst doing so, then the caller should get a
> >  reference on them using:
> 
> How about changing the documentation to explain why you can't just use a spinlock
> or local_irq_disable instead of rcu_read_lock? You explained it well in your
> [patch 0/9], but that part had not occurred to me yet and having it in the kernel
> sources might prevent more people from getting it wrong in the future.

That does make a lot of sense...  Will add that in.

							Thanx, Paul