Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:42:05 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] workqueue: Convert for_each_wq to use built-in list
 check (v2)
Message-ID: <20190814224205.GC69375@google.com>
References: <20190811221111.99401-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <20190814194841.GA588936@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190814194841.GA588936@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 12:48:41PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Joel.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 06:11:09PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > list_for_each_entry_rcu now has support to check for RCU reader sections
> > as well as lock. Just use the support in it, instead of explicitly
> > checking in the caller.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>

Thanks.

> >  #define for_each_pwq(pwq, wq)						\
> > -	list_for_each_entry_rcu((pwq), &(wq)->pwqs, pwqs_node)		\
> > -		if (({ assert_rcu_or_wq_mutex(wq); false; })) { }	\
> > -		else
> > +	list_for_each_entry_rcu((pwq), &(wq)->pwqs, pwqs_node,		\
> > +				 lock_is_held(&(wq->mutex).dep_map))
> 
> Why not lockdep_is_held() tho?

Yes, that's better.

thanks,

 - Joel