On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:37:14PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > I am planning to take out the check in check_deadlock and only have the test > in lock_acquire which change a 3 to 2 when in interrupt context. Now my > question is whether to do it as a new patch on top of the existing one in > tip or a total replacement. I also intend to use symbolic names for the read > states for better readability as suggested by John. Send new patches, the patches magically went away from tip. I don't care too much about the symbolic thing, partly because the actual value is not irrelevant seeing how we're peddling with bitfields. Also, its an unrelated cleanup at best. When you do re-submit extend the locking self test scenarios to cover the new semantics as well.
Attachment:
pgpYuAg7VAUoP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
