From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755436Ab2DEQvz (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2012 12:51:55 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:50038 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753150Ab2DEQvy (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2012 12:51:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 19:51:48 +0300 From: Ilya Dryomov To: Bobby Powers Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Chris Mason , Andi Kleen , Jeff Mahoney , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Btrfs, lockdep: get_restripe_target: use lockdep in BUG_ON Message-ID: <20120405165148.GA2595@zambezi.lan> References: <1333570774-26462-1-git-send-email-bobbypowers@gmail.com> <1333591452-23264-1-git-send-email-bobbypowers@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 12:23:01PM -0400, Bobby Powers wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Bobby Powers wrote: > > spin_is_locked always returns 0 on non-SMP systems, which causes btrfs > > to fail the mount.  There is documentation pending as to why checking > > I guess I should be explicit in stating that this is a regression, so > this patch or something else that addresses it should be pulled into > 3.4. Yes, this is a regression and spin_is_locked() definitely has to go. I don't have a strong opinion on this assert, if there are objections to v2 I'm OK with ripping that BUG_ON entirely and replacing it with a comment (this function and its callers are WIP). Thanks, Ilya