Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:45:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:45:35 -0400 Received: from mail.storm.ca ([209.87.239.66]:58005 "EHLO mail.storm.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:45:34 -0400 Message-ID: <3D2E1A4D.10705EA5@storm.ca> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:52:45 -0400 From: Sandy Harris Organization: Flashman's Dragoons X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Xymoron CC: Daniel Phillips , Jesse Barnes , Andreas Dilger , kernel-janitor-discuss , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: spinlock assertion macros References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1192 Lines: 34 Oliver Xymoron wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > I was thinking of something as simple as: > > > > #define spin_assert_locked(LOCK) BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked(LOCK)) > > > > but in truth I'd be happy regardless of the internal implementation. A note > > on names: Linus likes to shout the names of his BUG macros. I've never been > > one for shouting, but it's not my kernel, and anyway, I'm happy he now likes > > asserts. I bet he'd like it more spelled like this though: > > > > MUST_HOLD(&lock); > > I prefer that form too. Is it worth adding MUST_NOT_HOLD(&lock) in an attempt to catch potential deadlocks? Say that if two or more of locks A, B and C are to be taken, then they must be taken in that order. You might then have code like: MUST_NOT_HOLD(&lock_B) ; MUST_NOT_HOLD(&lock_C) ; spinlock(&lock_A) ; I think you need a separate asertion for this !MUST_NOT_HOLD(&lock) has different semantics. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/