Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] lock assertion macros for 2.5.30 | Date | Thu, 8 Aug 2002 00:30:10 +0200 |
| |
A couple of whitespace glitches:
> +#if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) && defined(CONFIG_SMP) > +#define MUST_HOLD(lock) BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked(lock)) > +#define MUST_NOT_HOLD(lock) BUG_ON(spin_is_locked(lock)) > +#define MUST_HOLD_RW(lock) BUG_ON(!rwlock_is_locked(lock)) > +#else > +#define MUST_HOLD(lock) do { } while(0) > +#define MUST_NOT_HOLD(lock) do { } while(0) > +#define MUST_HOLD_RW(lock) do { } while(0) > +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK && CONFIG_SMP */
Random gripe: don't all those do { } whiles look silly? We need
#define NADA do { } while (0)
or similar.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |