[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5672620A.4060104@sandisk.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:19:38 +0100
From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...n.com>,
Dick Kennedy <dick.kennedy@...gotech.com>,
James Smart <james.smart@...gotech.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC: <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] lpfc: Add lockdep assertions
On 11/20/2015 01:37 PM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Several functions in lpfc have comments stating that the function must be
> called with the hbalock (or hostlock, or ringlock) held. Add
> lockdep_assert_held() annotations to these functions, so one can actually
> verify the locks are held.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> @@ -2647,6 +2675,7 @@ lpfc_sli_iocbq_lookup(struct lpfc_hba *phba,
> {
> struct lpfc_iocbq *cmd_iocb = NULL;
> uint16_t iotag;
> + lockdep_assert_held(&phba->hbalock);
>
> iotag = prspiocb->iocb.ulpIoTag;
(replying to an e-mail of one month ago)
Please leave a blank line after declarations. Checkpatch should have
reported this. Anyway:
Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
--
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