lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch] lockdep: annotate mm/slab.c


    On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    >
    > +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
    > +
    > +/*
    > + * Slab sometimes uses the kmalloc slabs to store the slab headers
    > + * for other slabs "off slab".
    > + * The locking for this is tricky in that it nests within the locks
    > + * of all other slabs in a few places; to deal with this special
    > + * locking we put on-slab caches into a separate lock-class.
    > + */
    > +static struct lock_class_key on_slab_key;
    > +
    > +static inline void init_lock_keys(struct cache_sizes *s)
    > +{
    > + int q;
    > +
    > + for (q = 0; q < MAX_NUMNODES; q++) {
    > + if (!s->cs_cachep->nodelists[q] || OFF_SLAB(s->cs_cachep))
    > + continue;
    > + lockdep_set_class(&s->cs_cachep->nodelists[q]->list_lock,
    > + &on_slab_key);
    > + }
    > +}
    > +
    > +#else
    > +static inline void init_lock_keys(struct cache_sizes *s)
    > +{
    > +}
    > +#endif

    Why isn't the "on_slab_key" local to just the init_lock_keys() function,
    and the #ifdef around it all?

    Ie just

    static inline void init_lock_keys(struct cache_sizes *s)
    {
    #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
    static struct lock_class_key on_slab_key;
    int q;

    for (q = 0; q < MAX_NUMNODES; q++) {
    ...
    #endif CONFIG_LOCKDEP
    }

    instead?

    Linus
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.024 / U:3.580 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site