From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lance Roy Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] wireless: Replace spin_is_locked() with lockdep Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 23:57:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20181004065720.GE896@E570.localdomain> References: <20181003053902.6910-1-ldr709@gmail.com> <20181003053902.6910-9-ldr709@gmail.com> <877eizjt5j.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , Daniel Drake , Ulrich Kunitz , "David S. Miller" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Kalle Valo Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877eizjt5j.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 12:06:48PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Lance Roy writes: > > > 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 > > Cc: Daniel Drake > > Cc: Ulrich Kunitz > > Cc: Kalle Valo > > Cc: "David S. Miller" > > Cc: > > Cc: > > --- > > drivers/net/wireless/zydas/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Should I take this or is it going through some other tree? Sure you can take this if you like. If not, Paul McKenney will take it in his tree. Thanks, Lance > If it goes to via some other tree: > > Acked-by: Kalle Valo > > -- > Kalle Valo