Re: [PATCH 1/2] lockdep: add lockdep_assert_not_held()

[Shuah Khan]

On 2/15/21 9:10 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 17:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:12:30PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 11:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > I think something like so will work, but please double check.
> > >
> > > Yeah, that looks better.
> > >
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
> > > > @@ -294,11 +294,15 @@ extern void lock_unpin_lock(struct lockdep_map *lock, struct pin_cookie);
> > > >   
> > > >   #define lockdep_depth(tsk)	(debug_locks ? (tsk)->lockdep_depth : 0)
> > > >   
> > > > -#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {				\
> > > > -		WARN_ON(debug_locks && !lockdep_is_held(l));	\
> > > > +#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {					\
> > > > +		WARN_ON(debug_locks && lockdep_is_held(l) == 0));	\
> > > >   	} while (0)
> > >
> > > That doesn't really need to change? It's the same.
> >
> > Correct, but I found it more symmetric vs the not implementation below.
>
> Fair enough. One might argue that you should have an
>
> enum lockdep_lock_state {
> 	LOCK_STATE_NOT_HELD, /* 0 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_HELD, /* 1 now */
> 	LOCK_STATE_UNKNOWN, /* -1 with your patch but might as well be 2 */
> };
>
> :)


Thank you both. Picking this back up. Will send v2 incorporating
your comments and suggestions.

thanks,
-- Shuah