[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180405074749.GA23889@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 00:47:49 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] locking: Document the semantics of
spin_is_locked()
Can't we just kill off spin_is_locked? It seems pretty much all uses
should simply be replaced with lockdep annotations, and there aren't
many to start with.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists