-
由 Oleg Nesterov 提交于
The "int check" argument of lock_acquire() and held_lock->check are misleading. This is actually a boolean: 2 means "true", everything else is "false". And there is no need to pass 1 or 0 to lock_acquire() depending on CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, __lock_acquire() checks prove_locking at the start and clears "check" if !CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING. Note: probably we can simply kill this member/arg. The only explicit user of check => 0 is rcu_lock_acquire(), perhaps we can change it to use lock_acquire(trylock =>, read => 2). __lockdep_no_validate means check => 0 implicitly, but we can change validate_chain() to check hlock->instance->key instead. Not to mention it would be nice to get rid of lockdep_set_novalidate_class(). Signed-off-by: NOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> Cc: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140120182006.GA26495@redhat.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
fb9edbe9