Re: [PATCH 08/16] wireless: Replace spin_is_locked() with lockdep

Lance Roy [off-list ref] writes:

lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements,
since it won't get confused when someone else holds the lock. This is
also a step towards possibly removing spin_is_locked().

Signed-off-by: Lance Roy <redacted>
Cc: Daniel Drake <redacted>
Cc: Ulrich Kunitz <redacted>
Cc: Kalle Valo <redacted>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/zydas/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Should I take this or is it going through some other tree?

If it goes to via some other tree:

Acked-by: Kalle Valo <redacted>

-- 
Kalle Valo

On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 12:06:48PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:

Lance Roy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

lockdep_assert_held() is better suited to checking locking requirements,
since it won't get confused when someone else holds the lock. This is
also a step towards possibly removing spin_is_locked().

Signed-off-by: Lance Roy <redacted>
Cc: Daniel Drake <redacted>
Cc: Ulrich Kunitz <redacted>
Cc: Kalle Valo <redacted>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/zydas/zd1211rw/zd_mac.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Should I take this or is it going through some other tree?

Sure you can take this if you like. If not, Paul McKenney will take it in his
tree.

Thanks,
Lance

If it goes to via some other tree:

Acked-by: Kalle Valo <redacted>

--
Kalle Valo