[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] block: add assert_spin_locked() to ensure lock is held
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 21:48, Jens Axboe <> wrote:
> As far as I know, no such bug has ever occurred that I know
> of. So while I don't mind adding such instrumentation, there's
> little point to doing it when you are not seeing any usability
> problems in there. And all these paths (requeue less) are
> heavily used, so problems would appear quickly.

I didn't see any problems in there. I just thought
if a code has such a restriction, generally it is better
to have an explicit assertion in the code also
not only in comments. Since those functions are
EXPORTed ones I thought there will be a possibility
of misusing them, although they could be found
quickly without this facility. :-)

Namhyung Kim

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-09-15 15:19    [W:0.034 / U:3.204 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site