On Oct 7, 2012, at 7:30 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:28:16PM -0500, Ed Cashin wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
...
>>> From 0b862fc1a131a874d157420e9443f16a714596ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 12:41:13 -0700
>>> Subject: [PATCH] linux/compiler.h: Add __must_hold macro for functions called with a lock held
>>
>> Ah. OK. So... would you like me to submit your patch to the LKML, or are you doing that?
>>
>> It seems like a needed addition.
>
> If you can confirm that it works for you, I'll send it to LKML with a
> Tested-by from you.
Does my usage in demo.c (as shown below) look correct to you? If so, then I can confirm that it eliminates the warnings as intended.
Similar usage in the original code that motivated this inquiry also passes sparse when using __must_hold() with your patch applied.
[ecashin@marino linux]$ nl -b a drivers/block/aoe/demo.c
1 #include <linux/netdevice.h>
2 #include <linux/compiler.h>
3
4 static spinlock_t lk;
5 static struct sk_buff_head q;
6 int demofn(void);
7
8 /* enters with lk held */
9 int demofn(void) __must_hold(&lk)
10 {
11 struct sk_buff *skb;
12
13 while ((skb = skb_dequeue(&q))) {
14 spin_unlock_irq(&lk);
15 if (dev_queue_xmit(skb) == NET_XMIT_DROP && net_ratelimit())
16 pr_warn("informative warning\n");
17 spin_lock_irq(&lk);
18 }
19 return 0;
20 }
[ecashin@marino linux]$
Thanks much!
--
Ed Cashin
ecashin@xxxxxxxxxx
--
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
