Re: [PATCH v2] spin_lock_nested(): Always evaluate second argument

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, Bart Van Assche wrote:

> diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> index 3f2867f..485d5dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> @@ -197,7 +197,8 @@ static inline void do_raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock) __releases(lock)
>  		 _raw_spin_lock_nest_lock(lock, &(nest_lock)->dep_map);	\
>  	 } while (0)
>  #else
> -# define raw_spin_lock_nested(lock, subclass)		_raw_spin_lock(lock)
> +# define raw_spin_lock_nested(lock, subclass)		\
> +	((void)(subclass), _raw_spin_lock(lock))
>  # define raw_spin_lock_nest_lock(lock, nest_lock)	_raw_spin_lock(lock)
>  #endif
>  

I think it would be nice to comment why we're evaluating the subclass when 
CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=n so that nobody comes along and unknowingly 
changes it back.

Thanks for posting the updated version and keeping at it!
--
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/