* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How about I just kill it now, so that it just doesn't exist, and the
> dust (from all the other things) can settle where it will?
>
> In fact, I think I will remove the whole "rwlock_is_locked()" thing
> and the only user, since it's all clearly broken, and regardless of
> what we do it will be something else. That will at least fix the
> current problem, and only leave us doing too many bus accesses when
> BKL_PREEMPT is enabled.
in the 5-patch stream i just sent there's no need to touch exit.c, and
the debugging check didnt hurt. But if you remove it from spinlock.h now
then i'll probably have to regenerate the 5 patches again :-| We can:
- nuke it afterwards
- or can leave it alone as-is (it did catch a couple of bugs in the past)
- or can change the rwlock_is_locked() to !write_can_lock() and remove
rwlock_is_locked() [!write_can_lock() is a perfect replacement for
it].
i'd prefer #3.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
