On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:00:31PM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 10:36:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> ...
> > -#define lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled() do { \
> > - WARN_ONCE(debug_locks && !current->lockdep_recursion && \
> > - current->hardirqs_enabled, \
> > - "IRQs not disabled as expected\n"); \
> > - } while (0)
> > +#define lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled() \
> > +do { \
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(debug_locks && !this_cpu_read(hardirqs_enabled)); \
> > +} while (0)
> >
>
> Can we add a small comment on top of lockdep_off(), stating that lockdep
> IRQ tracking will still be kept after a lockdep_off call?
That would only legitimize lockdep_off(). The only comment I want to put
on that is: "if you use this, you're doing it wrong'.
