locking/atomics: Update comment about READ_ONCE() and structures

The comment is out of data. Also point out the performance drawback
of the barrier();__builtin_memcpy(); barrier() followed by another
copy from stack (__u) to lvalue;

Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <[email protected]>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
[ Made it a bit more readable. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

1 files changed, 3 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 00b042c49ccd..4291592b6433 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -263,8 +263,9 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
  * In contrast to ACCESS_ONCE these two macros will also work on aggregate
  * data types like structs or unions. If the size of the accessed data
  * type exceeds the word size of the machine (e.g., 32 bits or 64 bits)
- * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE()  will fall back to memcpy and print a
- * compile-time warning.
+ * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() will fall back to memcpy(). There's at
+ * least two memcpy()s: one for the __builtin_memcpy() and then one for
+ * the macro doing the copy of variable - '__u' allocated on the stack.
  *
  * Their two major use cases are: (1) Mediating communication between
  * process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,