From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] drm/i915: allow package C8+ states on
 Haswell (disabled)
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 18:34:56 -0300
Message-ID: <CA+gsUGS1muDjCStyt5KxV1B-B1kwm-4B9dWnpPWXR6PGyuDBFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20130807160243.GX22035@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<1376079005-25115-1-git-send-email-przanoni@gmail.com>
	<20130809203248.GA11603@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com (mail-ob0-f174.google.com
	[209.85.214.174])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FF8AE5C77
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri,  9 Aug 2013 14:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id wd6so4436878obb.19
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 09 Aug 2013 14:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130809203248.GA11603@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@gmail.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

2013/8/9 Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>:
> Quick note...
>
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 05:10:05PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
>> +     WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&dev_priv->pc8.lock));
>
> Preferred form is now lockdep_assert_held(&dev_priv->pc8.lock);

Should I also convert all our other usages of
WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked()) and BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked()) too? On a
separate patch, of course. We have currently no usage of
lockdep_assert_held, and I like consistency, so fully switching to the
preferred form is good IMHO.

> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre



-- 
Paulo Zanoni