On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > BTW., I don't think the #ifdef is necessary: lockdep_init_map_crosslock > > > should map > > > to nothing when lockdep is disabled, right? > > > > IIUC, lockdep_init_map_crosslock is only defined when > > CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE=y, > > Then lockdep_init_map_crosslock() should be defined in the !LOCKDEP case as > well. > > > [...] moreover, completion::map, which used as > > the parameter of lockdep_init_map_crosslock(), is only defined when > > CONFIG_LOCKDEP_COMPLETE=y. > > If the !LOCKDEP wrapper is a CPP macro then it can ignore that parameter just > fine, and it won't be built. >
Oops, I miss this part.. so I will cook a patch define
lockdep_init_map_crosslock() when !LOCKDEP and I think based on that,
there is no need to introducde INIT_WQ_BARRIER_ONSTACK(), we can simply:
lockdep_init_map_crosslock(...);
__init_completion();
in insert_wq_barrier(). Simpler.
Thanks for your suggestion.
Regards,
Boqun
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
