[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <309B89C4C689E141A5FF6A0C5FB2118B9657ABF9@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 00:11:37 +0000
From: "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
To: Lance Roy <ldr709@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/16] igbvf: Replace spin_is_locked() with lockdep
> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Lance Roy
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 10:39 PM
> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>; Lance Roy
> <ldr709@...il.com>; Kirsher, Jeffrey T <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>; David
> S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: [PATCH 05/16] igbvf: Replace spin_is_locked() with lockdep
>
> 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 <ldr709@...il.com>
> Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
> Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/mbx.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists