On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:49:46PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> * Josh Cartwright | 2016-03-31 00:04:25 [-0500]:
>
> >diff --git a/include/linux/list_bl.h b/include/linux/list_bl.h
> >index 44f0b55..a1bfb3b 100644
> >--- a/include/linux/list_bl.h
> >+++ b/include/linux/list_bl.h
> >@@ -42,13 +42,16 @@ struct hlist_bl_node {
> > struct hlist_bl_node *next, **pprev;
> > };
> >
> >-static inline void INIT_HLIST_BL_HEAD(struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> >-{
> >- h->first = NULL;
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_BASE
> >- raw_spin_lock_init(&h->lock);
> >+#define INIT_HLIST_BL_HEAD(h) \
> >+do { \
> >+ (h)->first = NULL; \
> >+ raw_spin_lock_init(&(h)->lock); \
> >+} while (0)
> >+#else
> >+#define INIT_HLIST_BL_HEAD(h) \
> >+ (h)->first = NULL; \
>
> I switched the else part to
>
> #define INIT_HLIST_BL_HEAD(h) (h)->first = NULL
That works, thanks. I had it wrapped it in do { } while(0);, but
checkpatch complained.
Anyway, I decided to do some grepping, and this particular case isn't
the only one where there might be unintentional lockdep class sharing.
I hope to follow up on this when I'm not traveling.
Josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
