Re: [PATCH] Locking: Let PREEMPT_RT compile again with new rwsem asserts.

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>]

On 2024-03-19 13:38:06 [+0000], Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 08:05:50AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > -static inline void rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep(const struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> > +static __always_inline bool rwsem_held_write(const struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> 
> The locking maintainers were very clear that this predicate Should Not
> Exist.  It encourages people to write bad code.  Assertions only!

What do you refer to? The inline vs __always_inline or
rwsem_held_write() should not exists and it should invoke directly
rw_base_is_write_locked()?

> >  {
> > -	rw_base_assert_held_write(sem);
> > +	return rw_base_is_write_locked(&sem->rwbase);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static __always_inline void rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep(const struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> > +{
> > +	WARN_ON(!rwsem_held_write(sem));
> >  }
> >  
> >  static __always_inline int rwsem_is_contended(struct rw_semaphore *sem)

Sebastian