From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 30/52] fs: icache lock lru/writeback lists
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:09:08 +1000
Message-ID: <20100624150908.GG10441@laptop>
References: <20100624030212.676457061@suse.de>
 <20100624030730.419497214@suse.de>
 <1277369888.1875.929.camel@laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
	Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1277369888.1875.929.camel@laptop>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

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.