On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 20:28:10 -0000 Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
> The conditions under which deadlock detection is conducted are unclear > and undocumented. > > Add constants instead of using 0/1 and provide a selection function > which hides the additional debug dependency from the calling code. > > Add comments where needed. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> > --- > kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c | 5 +- > kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.h | 7 ++-- > kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 69 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > kernel/locking/rtmutex.h | 7 +++- > kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 15 ++++++++ > 5 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > > Index: tip/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c > =================================================================== > --- tip.orig/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c > +++ tip/kernel/locking/rtmutex-debug.c > @@ -66,12 +66,13 @@ void rt_mutex_debug_task_free(struct tas > * the deadlock. We print when we return. act_waiter can be NULL in > * case of a remove waiter operation. > */ > -void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(int detect, struct rt_mutex_waiter *act_waiter, > +void debug_rt_mutex_deadlock(enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk, > + struct rt_mutex_waiter *act_waiter, > struct rt_mutex *lock) > { > struct task_struct *task; > > - if (!debug_locks || detect || !act_waiter) > + if (!debug_locks || chwalk || !act_waiter) I know this will probably get a little verbose, but chwalk isn't very descriptive. Perhaps change this to: if (!debug_locks || chwalk == RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK || !act_waiter) To cut down on the verbosity, we could add helper macros: #define chwalk_is_full(chwalk) ((chwalk) == RT_MUTEX_FULL_CHAINWALK) #define chwalk_is_min(chwalk) ((chwalk) == RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK) And then the above would simply be: if (!debug_locks || chwalk_is_full(chwalk) || !act_waiter) And put this throughout. -- Steve -- 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/
