@@ -49,13 +49,7 @@ void uverbs_uobject_get(struct ib_uobject *uobject)
static void uverbs_uobject_free(struct kref *ref)
{
- struct ib_uobject *uobj =
- container_of(ref, struct ib_uobject, ref);
-
- if (uobj->uapi_object->type_class->needs_kfree_rcu)
- kfree_rcu(uobj, rcu);
- else
- kfree(uobj);
+ kfree_rcu(container_of(ref, struct ib_uobject, ref), rcu);
}
void uverbs_uobject_put(struct ib_uobject *uobject)
@@ -744,20 +738,6 @@ const struct uverbs_obj_type_class uverbs_idr_class = {
.lookup_put = lookup_put_idr_uobject,
.destroy_hw = destroy_hw_idr_uobject,
.remove_handle = remove_handle_idr_uobject,
- /*
- * When we destroy an object, we first just lock it for WRITE and
- * actually DESTROY it in the finalize stage. So, the problematic
- * scenario is when we just started the finalize stage of the
- * destruction (nothing was executed yet). Now, the other thread
- * fetched the object for READ access, but it didn't lock it yet.
- * The DESTROY thread continues and starts destroying the object.
- * When the other thread continue - without the RCU, it would
- * access freed memory. However, the rcu_read_lock delays the free
- * until the rcu_read_lock of the READ operation quits. Since the
- * exclusive lock of the object is still taken by the DESTROY flow, the
- * READ operation will get -EBUSY and it'll just bail out.
- */
- .needs_kfree_rcu = true,
};
EXPORT_SYMBOL(uverbs_idr_class);
@@ -920,7 +900,6 @@ const struct uverbs_obj_type_class uverbs_fd_class = {
.lookup_put = lookup_put_fd_uobject,
.destroy_hw = destroy_hw_fd_uobject,
.remove_handle = remove_handle_fd_uobject,
- .needs_kfree_rcu = false,
};
EXPORT_SYMBOL(uverbs_fd_class);
@@ -98,7 +98,6 @@ struct uverbs_obj_type_class {
enum rdma_remove_reason why,
struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs);
void (*remove_handle)(struct ib_uobject *uobj);
- u8 needs_kfree_rcu;
};
struct uverbs_obj_type {