On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Jesse Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Gregory Farnum wrote: > > > Otherwise, this sounds like a fine idea to me. Trying to unify these > > behaviors from a code style perspective is long overdue given our > > other modernization efforts. :) > > Total agreement-- and, FWIW, /besides/ lockdep, every single Mutex and Cond > call can absolutely be replaced with the C++ standard library at this point. I think one wrinkle is that we have lots of lines like assert(lock.is_locked_by_me()); sprinkled about, usually at the top of internal _foo() methods. I don't think there is a std::mutex equivalent (that operates on the mutex itself and not a std::unique_lock). I'm not sure if it's worth trying to keep something like this around for the debug_mutex... I think we'd need to create some sort of macro like ASSERT_MUTEX_LOCKED(lock) that compiles away to nothing in the std::mutex case? sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
