Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 1/5] xen/spinlocks: in debug builds store cpu holding the lock

[Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 12.09.19 15:36, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.09.2019 15:28, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > @@ -267,6 +288,7 @@ int _spin_trylock_recursive(spinlock_t *lock)
> >   
> >       /* Don't allow overflow of recurse_cpu field. */
> >       BUILD_BUG_ON(NR_CPUS > SPINLOCK_NO_CPU);
> > +    BUILD_BUG_ON(SPINLOCK_RECURSE_BITS <= 0);
> This is too weak: While I don't think we strictly need 15 levels of
> recursion, I also don't think we'll get away with just 1. I think
> this minimally needs to be "<= 1", perhaps better "<= 2". Other
> thoughts (also by others) on the precise value to use here
> appreciated. With this suitably taken care of (which can happen
> while committing, but must not be forgotten)
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
"2" should be no problem, as the other added

BUILD_BUG_ON(LOCK_DEBUG_PAD_BITS·<=·0);

is implying that already.


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel