All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, kvalo@codeaurora.org,
	davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: add lockdep_assert_not_held()
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 13:51:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9293180-3eba-a5f3-b34e-b44ebdd60077@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb819e72fb2d897e603654d44aeda8c6f337453f.camel@sipsolutions.net>

On 2/15/21 9:10 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 17:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:12:30PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 11:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> I think something like so will work, but please double check.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that looks better.
>>>
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
>>>> @@ -294,11 +294,15 @@ extern void lock_unpin_lock(struct lockdep_map *lock, struct pin_cookie);
>>>>   
>>>>   #define lockdep_depth(tsk)	(debug_locks ? (tsk)->lockdep_depth : 0)
>>>>   
>>>> -#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {				\
>>>> -		WARN_ON(debug_locks && !lockdep_is_held(l));	\
>>>> +#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {					\
>>>> +		WARN_ON(debug_locks && lockdep_is_held(l) == 0));	\
>>>>   	} while (0)
>>>
>>> That doesn't really need to change? It's the same.
>>
>> Correct, but I found it more symmetric vs the not implementation below.
> 
> Fair enough. One might argue that you should have an
> 
> enum lockdep_lock_state {
> 	LOCK_STATE_NOT_HELD, /* 0 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_HELD, /* 1 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_UNKNOWN, /* -1 with your patch but might as well be 2 */
> };
> 
> :)
> 


Thank you both. Picking this back up. Will send v2 incorporating
your comments and suggestions.

thanks,
-- Shuah






WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	kuba@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
	kvalo@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: add lockdep_assert_not_held()
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 13:51:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9293180-3eba-a5f3-b34e-b44ebdd60077@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb819e72fb2d897e603654d44aeda8c6f337453f.camel@sipsolutions.net>

On 2/15/21 9:10 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 17:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:12:30PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 11:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> I think something like so will work, but please double check.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that looks better.
>>>
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
>>>> @@ -294,11 +294,15 @@ extern void lock_unpin_lock(struct lockdep_map *lock, struct pin_cookie);
>>>>   
>>>>   #define lockdep_depth(tsk)	(debug_locks ? (tsk)->lockdep_depth : 0)
>>>>   
>>>> -#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {				\
>>>> -		WARN_ON(debug_locks && !lockdep_is_held(l));	\
>>>> +#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {					\
>>>> +		WARN_ON(debug_locks && lockdep_is_held(l) == 0));	\
>>>>   	} while (0)
>>>
>>> That doesn't really need to change? It's the same.
>>
>> Correct, but I found it more symmetric vs the not implementation below.
> 
> Fair enough. One might argue that you should have an
> 
> enum lockdep_lock_state {
> 	LOCK_STATE_NOT_HELD, /* 0 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_HELD, /* 1 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_UNKNOWN, /* -1 with your patch but might as well be 2 */
> };
> 
> :)
> 


Thank you both. Picking this back up. Will send v2 incorporating
your comments and suggestions.

thanks,
-- Shuah






_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-22 20:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-12 23:28 [PATCH 0/2] Add lockdep_assert_not_held() Shuah Khan
2021-02-12 23:28 ` Shuah Khan
2021-02-12 23:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: add lockdep_assert_not_held() Shuah Khan
2021-02-12 23:28   ` Shuah Khan
2021-02-14 17:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-14 17:53     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-15 10:44     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-15 10:44       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-15 13:12       ` Johannes Berg
2021-02-15 13:12         ` Johannes Berg
2021-02-15 16:04         ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-15 16:04           ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-15 16:10           ` Johannes Berg
2021-02-15 16:10             ` Johannes Berg
2021-02-22 20:51             ` Shuah Khan [this message]
2021-02-22 20:51               ` Shuah Khan
2021-02-12 23:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: detect conf_mutex held ath10k_drain_tx() calls Shuah Khan
2021-02-12 23:28   ` Shuah Khan
2021-02-14  6:08   ` Kalle Valo
2021-02-14  6:08     ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=c9293180-3eba-a5f3-b34e-b44ebdd60077@linuxfoundation.org \
    --to=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.