From: Peter Zijlstra on
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:02 +1000, npiggin(a)suse.de wrote:
> + assert_spin_locked(&wb_inode_list_lock);

There's also lockdep_assert_held() which also validates we're the owner.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Nick Piggin on
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:58:08AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:02 +1000, npiggin(a)suse.de wrote:
> > + assert_spin_locked(&wb_inode_list_lock);
>
> There's also lockdep_assert_held() which also validates we're the owner.

These locks should have such miniscule contention now that they
effectively mean the same thing :) But no that's a good suggestion
thanks. I guess _most_ assert_spin_locked could be changed over.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Peter Zijlstra on
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 01:09 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:58:08AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:02 +1000, npiggin(a)suse.de wrote:
> > > + assert_spin_locked(&wb_inode_list_lock);
> >
> > There's also lockdep_assert_held() which also validates we're the owner.
>
> These locks should have such miniscule contention now that they
> effectively mean the same thing :) But no that's a good suggestion
> thanks. I guess _most_ assert_spin_locked could be changed over.

Probably, I just haven't felt like actually visiting all sites to
check ;-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/