On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 02:31:40PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Agreed. I'll post another patch that doesn't mess with the scsi
> > stuff. Maybe later I can put together a useful
> > 'lock-not-held-on-this-cpu' macro.
>
> You don't need to put this in a macro. This test is valid
> for ALL spinlocks in the kernel and can be done from inside
> the spin_lock() macro itself, when spinlock debugging is on.
Right, right after I posted I regretted using that term. Of course it
would have to include changes to spinlock_t and spin_lock/unlock.
Seems like it could be integrated somewhat easily with the lock
ordering stuff that was talked about earlier too.
Thanks,
Jesse
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 22:00:17 EST