doc: rcu: Add more rationale for using rcu_read_lock_sched in checklist
This commit explains why rcu_read_lock_sched is better than using
preempt_disable.
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
index 4974771..8860ab2 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@
pointer must be covered by rcu_read_lock(), rcu_read_lock_bh(),
rcu_read_lock_sched(), or by the appropriate update-side lock.
Disabling of preemption can serve as rcu_read_lock_sched(), but
- is less readable.
+ is less readable and prevents lockdep from detecting locking issues.
Letting RCU-protected pointers "leak" out of an RCU read-side
critical section is every bid as bad as letting them leak out