On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 16:52 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> I'm not sure how to resolve a situation like this:
>
>> static void lock(int bh_flag)
>> {
>> if (bh_flag)
>> spin_lock_bh(&some_lock);
>> else
>> spin_lock(&some_lock);
>
> The only generally accepted way is to not program locking dependent on
> flags.
Agreed, and that's what I'm trying to do actually. I think the above
is pure absolute garbage.
> You can sneak in sparse annotations to do it anyway, but I won't tell
> you how :)
If you mean by __acquires() and __releases() then that didn't help.
Luis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
