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

[Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>]

On 3/19/24 10:15, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> 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()?

Just merge rwsem_held_write() into rwsem_assert_held_write_nolockdep() 
and we should be all set.

Cheers,
Longman

>>>   {
>>> -	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
>