[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] lockdep: spin_lock_nest_lock()
 > NOTE: we're still bound to the MAX_LOCK_DEPTH (48) limit.

A) It is probably a good idea to put this in a comment somewhere near
where spin_lock_nest_lock() is declared.

B) It is probably a good idea to write that comment in such a way that
dumb people like me understand what the limit is. The sentence I
quoted above is too telegraphic for me to get. Is the point that no
more than 48 spinlocks can be held at once, even if the inner locks
are protected by some top level lock? Or do you mean something else?

- R.

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-04 16:09    [W:0.253 / U:1.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site