| Message ID | 20190109222144.14270-2-paulmck@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On 09/01/19 23:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements, > since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of > whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing > spin_is_locked(). > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com> > Cc: <kvm@vger.kernel.org> > --- > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void) > static void kvm_resume(void) > { > if (kvm_usage_count) { > - WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock)); > + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock); > hardware_enable_nolock(NULL); > } > } > Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:36:23PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 09/01/19 23:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements, > > since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of > > whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing > > spin_is_locked(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com> > > Cc: <kvm@vger.kernel.org> > > --- > > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void) > > static void kvm_resume(void) > > { > > if (kvm_usage_count) { > > - WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock)); > > + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock); > > hardware_enable_nolock(NULL); > > } > > } > > Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Applied, thank you! Thanx, Paul
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void) static void kvm_resume(void) { if (kvm_usage_count) { - WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock)); + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock); hardware_enable_nolock(NULL); } }
lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements, since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing spin_is_locked(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com> Cc: <kvm@vger.kernel.org> --- virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)