lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Is spin_is_locked() safe to use with BUG_ON()/WARN_ON()?
On 24/05/13 01:12, David Howells wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>> We do *not* want to add some crazy "spin_is_nt_locked". We just want
>> to get rid of these idiotic debug tests.
>
> Generally, I think you are right, though there are also some checks in
> deallocation routines that check that a spinlock is not currently held before
> releasing the memory holding it - should those be allowed to stay? I'd be
> tempted to wrap the whole check in something, perhaps an "spin_lock_uninit()"
> and move the check to a header file. Would this be useful for lockdep or
> anything like that?

lockdep has lockdep_assert_held(), which might be what you want. Though
it looks like it possibly also has the false positive issues on SMP?

~Ryan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-05-24 04:01    [W:0.041 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site