On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 03:27:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hurm, if you're going to directly use that maybe we should pick a better > name ;-) Fine with that. > Also, be sure to check the debug_locks variable, if that's cleared the > result of _lockdep_is_held() isn't reliable -- we stop tracking lock > state when there's an error. I already do. But I'm wondering if we can't simply move the debug_locks check into lockdep_is_held? It's already used directly in a few places, and that would also solve the whole naming issue. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
