[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1183626647.7054.61.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 11:10:47 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Sattler <tsattler@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debug work struct cancel deadlocks with lockdep
On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 11:08 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 11:01 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > You could of course make this STATIC_LOCKDEP_MAP_INIT() and place it
> > near lockdep_init_map() :-)
> >
> > That way it would be clear that changes to either ought to be reflected
> > in the other.
>
> Sure. I have to repost anyway :)
>
> How about
>
> +/* both _name and _key must not be NULL */
> +#define STATIC_LOCKDEP_MAP_INIT(_name, _key) \
> + { .name = (_name), .key = (_key), }
looks sane enough :-)
> That'll still require some #ifdef foo inside workqueue.h but I think
> it's cleaner to put just this into lockdep.h
It is.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists