On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 07:25 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > I don't like ASSERT_RTNL() much because it actually tries to lock it. > > I'd be much happer if it was WARN_ON(!mutex_locked(&rtnl_mutex)) or > > something equivalent. > > Ah! It would indeed be nice to have a lower-overhead ASSERT_RTNL_LIGHT() > or whatever. I don't know why it tries that anyway. Maybe it's from semaphore days where you couldn't check _is_locked()? > > In any case, I have an updated patch I'll be sending soon, and it > > requires a new list walking primitive I'll also send. > > Look forward to seeing it! Will send in a minute. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
