Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:43:59 +0100 | From | Jarek Poplawski <> | Subject | Re: [patch] lock debugging: fix DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON() & debug_locks_silent |
| |
On 16-12-2006 09:04, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote: ... > Bug-found-by: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > --- > include/linux/debug_locks.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Index: linux/include/linux/debug_locks.h > =================================================================== > --- linux.orig/include/linux/debug_locks.h > +++ linux/include/linux/debug_locks.h > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ extern int debug_locks_off(void); > int __ret = 0; \ > \ > if (unlikely(c)) { \ > - if (debug_locks_silent || debug_locks_off()) \ > + if (!debug_locks_silent && debug_locks_off()) \ > WARN_ON(1); \ > __ret = 1; \ > } \
I wonder why doing debug_locks_off depends here on debug_lock_silent state which is only "esthetical" flag. And debug_locks_off() takes into consideration debug_lock_silent after all. So IMHO:
if (unlikely(c)) { \ if (debug_locks_off()) \ WARN_ON(1); \ __ret = 1; \ } \
Jarek P. - 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/
| |