On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:36:23PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 09/01/19 23:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements,
> > since it only checks if the current thread holds the lock regardless of
> > whether someone else does. This is also a step towards possibly removing
> > spin_is_locked().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > index 1f888a103f78..ec758bb7eeba 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > @@ -4078,7 +4078,7 @@ static int kvm_suspend(void)
> > static void kvm_resume(void)
> > {
> > if (kvm_usage_count) {
> > - WARN_ON(raw_spin_is_locked(&kvm_count_lock));
> > + lockdep_assert_held(&kvm_count_lock);
> > hardware_enable_nolock(NULL);
> > }
> > }
>
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Applied, thank you!
Thanx, Paul
