Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] spinlock: improve spin_is_locked() for recursive locks

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 24.03.16 at 16:55, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 24/03/16 11:30, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Recursive locks know their current owner, and since we use the function
>> solely to determine whether a particular lock is being held by the
>> current CPU (which so far has been an imprecise check), make actually
>> check the owner for recusrively acquired locks.
> 
> What's the expected behaviour of _spin_is_locked() if the lock is held
> by another CPU?
> 
> Before it may return true if it is held by another CPU, now it will
> always return false in this case.

Correct - hence the reference to this only being used for a limited
set of cases (read: ASSERT()s and alike).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel