Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [RFC] rcu: doc: update example about stale data
Date:   Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:16:53 -0700
Message-Id: <20181028021653.155513-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

The RCU example for 'rejecting stale data' on system-call auditting
stops iterating through the rules if a deleted one is found. It makes
more sense to continue looking at other rules once a deleted one is
rejected. Although the original example is fine, this makes it more
meaningful.

Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
---
 Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt
index adb5a3782846..09e9a4fc723e 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/listRCU.txt
@@ -250,8 +250,7 @@ as follows:
 				spin_lock(&e->lock);
 				if (e->deleted) {
 					spin_unlock(&e->lock);
-					rcu_read_unlock();
-					return AUDIT_BUILD_CONTEXT;
+					continue;
 				}
 				rcu_read_unlock();
 				return state;
-- 
2.19.1.568.g152ad8e336-goog