Re: [PATCH v2] zd1211rw: replace ZD_ASSERT with lockdep_assert_held()

Hi Sanjeev,

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Sharma, Sanjeev
[off-list ref] wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: Johannes Berg [mailto:johannes@sipsolutions.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 3:42 PM
To: Sharma, Sanjeev
Cc: dsd@gentoo.org; kune@deine-taler.de; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] zd1211rw: replace ZD_ASSERT with lockdep_assert_held()

On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 15:39 +0530, Sanjeev Sharma wrote:

quoted

on some architecture spin_is_locked() always return false in
uniprocessor configuration and therefore it would be advise to replace
with lockdep_assert_held().

Signed-off-by: Sanjeev Sharma <redacted>
---
Changes in v2:
  - corrected the typo

quoted

Now it compiles, but you got the logic wrong.

quoted

+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c

@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ void zd_mac_clear(struct zd_mac *mac)  {
      flush_workqueue(zd_workqueue);
      zd_chip_clear(&mac->chip);
-     ZD_ASSERT(!spin_is_locked(&mac->lock));
+     lockdep_assert_held(&mac->lock);
      ZD_MEMCLEAR(mac, sizeof(struct zd_mac));  }

quoted

Look closely at this again.

I didn't understand where I  put wrong logic  ?

I find it helps to spell out what code is doing in words.

E.g. the line you're removing is:
ZD_ASSERT(!spin_is_locked(&mac->lock));

So, we'll assert when spin_is_locked(&mac->lock) is false, i.e. when
mac->lock is not spin locked.

This isn't the same as what you're replacing it with.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/