Lance Roy writes:
> lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements,
> since it won't get confused when someone else holds the lock. This is
> also a step towards possibly removing spin_is_locked().
>
> Signed-off-by: Lance Roy
> Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan"
> Cc: Haiyang Zhang
> Cc: Stephen Hemminger
> Cc:
> ---
> drivers/hv/hv_balloon.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hv/hv_balloon.c b/drivers/hv/hv_balloon.c
> index b1b788082793..41631512ae97 100644
> --- a/drivers/hv/hv_balloon.c
> +++ b/drivers/hv/hv_balloon.c
> @@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ static void hv_page_online_one(struct hv_hotadd_state
> *has, struct page *pg)
> __online_page_increment_counters(pg);
> __online_page_free(pg);
>
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!spin_is_locked(&dm_device.ha_lock));
> + lockdep_assert_held(&dm_device.ha_lock);
> dm_device.num_pages_onlined++;
> }
Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov
However,
lockdep_assert_held() is a no-op when !CONFIG_LOCKDEP but this doesn't
really matter: hv_page_online_one() is static and it has only two call
sites, both taking the dm_device.ha_lock lock - so the warning may just
go away.
--
Vitaly
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
