On 2/3/20 11:58 AM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> Add xfs_is_ilocked(), xfs_is_iolocked() and xfs_is_mmaplocked()
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Reichl <preichl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> index c5077e6326c7..80874c80df6d 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,59 @@ xfs_isilocked(
> ASSERT(0);
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +static inline bool
> +__xfs_is_ilocked(
> + struct rw_semaphore *rwsem,
> + bool shared,
> + bool excl)
> +{
> + bool locked = false;
> +
> + if (!rwsem_is_locked(rwsem))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (!debug_locks)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (shared)
> + locked = lockdep_is_held_type(rwsem, 0);
> +
> + if (excl)
> + locked |= lockdep_is_held_type(rwsem, 1);
> +
> + return locked;
> +}
> +
> +bool
> +xfs_is_ilocked(
> + struct xfs_inode *ip,
> + int lock_flags)
> +{
> + return __xfs_is_ilocked(&ip->i_lock.mr_lock,
> + (lock_flags & XFS_ILOCK_SHARED),
> + (lock_flags & XFS_ILOCK_EXCL));
> +}
Apologies for not following or chiming in sooner on the prior discussion.
It seems a little odd that we must specify the lock type to test to
each of these 3 functions which are already named after a specific lock type.
i.e.:
xfs_is_mmaplocked(XFS_MMAPLOCK_EXCL);
seems a little redundant, but more problematic:
xfs_is_mmaplocked(XFS_ILOCK_SHARED);
would be accepted and silently return false. I think that at least an
ASSERT() in each of the 3 functions to be sure we didn't pass in nonsense
flags would be wise.
-Eric
