From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [patch 30/52] fs: icache lock lru/writeback lists Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:13:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1277392412.1875.976.camel@laptop> References: <20100624030212.676457061@suse.de> <20100624030730.419497214@suse.de> <1277369888.1875.929.camel@laptop> <20100624150908.GG10441@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, John Stultz , Frank Mayhar To: Nick Piggin Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100624150908.GG10441@laptop> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 01:09 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:58:08AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:02 +1000, npiggin@suse.de wrote: > > > + assert_spin_locked(&wb_inode_list_lock); > > > > There's also lockdep_assert_held() which also validates we're the owner. > > These locks should have such miniscule contention now that they > effectively mean the same thing :) But no that's a good suggestion > thanks. I guess _most_ assert_spin_locked could be changed over. Probably, I just haven't felt like actually visiting all sites to check ;-)