Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 11 Feb 2000 19:12:58 -0800 | From | "David S. Miller" <> | Subject | Re: bug 2.3.43+ - nfsd assertions on UP |
| |
This should fix it. There really no correct way to define spin_is_locked() on uniprocessors, either would be correct depending upon the circumstances.
Eventually I'd like to add spin_assert_held() to the spinlock headers, but for now this is OK as the bug traps have served their purpose already.
--- vanilla/linux/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c Thu Feb 10 12:16:38 2000 +++ linux/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c Fri Feb 11 19:10:24 2000 @@ -64,7 +64,6 @@ static inline void svc_serv_enqueue(struct svc_serv *serv, struct svc_rqst *rqstp) { - BUG_TRAP(spin_is_locked(&serv->sv_lock)); rpc_append_list(&serv->sv_threads, rqstp); } @@ -74,7 +73,6 @@ static inline void svc_serv_dequeue(struct svc_serv *serv, struct svc_rqst *rqstp) { - BUG_TRAP(spin_is_locked(&serv->sv_lock)); rpc_remove_list(&serv->sv_threads, rqstp); } @@ -106,8 +104,6 @@ struct svc_serv *serv = svsk->sk_server; struct svc_rqst *rqstp; - BUG_TRAP(spin_is_locked(&svsk->sk_lock)); - /* NOTE: Local BH is already disabled by our caller. */ spin_lock(&serv->sv_lock); @@ -155,8 +151,6 @@ svc_sock_dequeue(struct svc_serv *serv) { struct svc_sock *svsk; - - BUG_TRAP(spin_is_locked(&serv->sv_lock)); if ((svsk = serv->sv_sockets) != NULL) rpc_remove_list(&serv->sv_sockets, svsk); - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |