Re: [PATCH UPDATED 10/13] block, cfq: unlink cfq_io_context'simmediately

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:31:19AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 02:31:07PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >  	BUG_ON(atomic_long_read(&ioc->refcount) <= 0);
> > +	if (locked_q)
> > +		lockdep_assert_held(locked_q->queue_lock);
> >  
> 
> Looks like lockdep_assert_held() can't be used if !CONFIG_LOCKDEP. So
> Jens had put following patch to fix one compilation issue. You might
> want to provide a null definition of lockdep_assert_held() in case
> of !CONFIG_LOCKDEP.
> 
> commit 334c2b0b8b2ab186fa198413386cba41fffcb4f2
> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Tue Oct 25 15:51:48 2011 +0200
> 
>     blk-throttle: use queue_is_locked() instead of lockdep_is_held()
>     
>     We can't use the latter if !CONFIG_LOCKDEP.
>     
>     Reported-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>

Eh?  lockdep.h has dummy definition if !CONFIG_LOCKDEP.  If
lockdep_is_held() is causing compilation failure on !CONFIG_LOCKDEP,
it's more likely to be have been caused by missing include than
anything else.  Jens, what was the failure?  lockdep_is_held()
provides way better protection against locking mistakes than
spin_is_locked().

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/