lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 13/26] locking: Add non-fatal spin lock assert
    On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
    > Hi Peter,
    >
    > On 09/03/2014 05:27 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 05:39:22PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
    > >> Provide method for non-essential or non-critical code to warn of
    > >> invariant errors.
    > >>
    > >> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
    > >> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    > >> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
    > >> Signed-off-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
    > >> ---
    > >> include/linux/spinlock.h | 1 +
    > >> include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h | 1 +
    > >> include/linux/spinlock_api_up.h | 1 +
    > >> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
    > >>
    > >> diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
    > >> index 3f2867f..8a9aaf1 100644
    > >> --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
    > >> +++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
    > >> @@ -394,6 +394,7 @@ static inline int spin_can_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
    > >> }
    > >>
    > >> #define assert_spin_locked(lock) assert_raw_spin_locked(&(lock)->rlock)
    > >> +#define warn_not_spin_locked(lock) warn_not_raw_spin_locked(&(lock)->rlock)
    > >>
    > >> /*
    > >> * Pull the atomic_t declaration:
    > >> diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h b/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
    > >> index 42dfab8..0ddd499 100644
    > >> --- a/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
    > >> +++ b/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h
    > >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
    > >> int in_lock_functions(unsigned long addr);
    > >>
    > >> #define assert_raw_spin_locked(x) BUG_ON(!raw_spin_is_locked(x))
    > >> +#define warn_not_raw_spin_locked(x) WARN_ON_ONCE(!raw_spin_is_locked(x))
    > >
    > > No we should remove assert_spin_locked() not add to it. Use
    > > lockdep_assert_held() instead.
    >
    > I probably should have been more descriptive in the changelog: this
    > is not for a test configuration, but rather, an assertion in an
    > exported api.

    So ?


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-09-03 17:21    [W:3.432 / U:0.676 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site