On 09/01/19 23:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements, > since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of > whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing > spin_is_locked(). > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > --- > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void) > static void kvm_resume(void) > { > if (kvm_usage_count) { > - WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock)); > + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock); > hardware_enable_nolock(NULL); > } > } >
Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>
