Re: Sparse fix for scsi_request_fn

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> Introduce new __holds() macro to tell sparse it's OK to drop and then
> reacquire a lock within a function.  Use it in scsi_request_fn.

Umm. This is why we write things like

	static void double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
		__releases(this_rq->lock)
		__acquires(busiest->lock)
		__acquires(this_rq->lock)
	{
		...

ie your "__holds()" is nothing new, and should be written as 
a pair of __releases(x) and __acquires(x), which is more readable anyway 
(since it actually says what the function does!)

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/