On 6/6/19 9:22 AM, Mark Johnston wrote: > Author: markj > Date: Thu Jun 6 16:22:29 2019 > New Revision: 348745 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/348745 > > Log: > Conditionalize an in_epoch() call on INVARIANTS. > > Its result is only used to determine whether to perform further > INVARIANTS-only checks. Remove a stale comment while here. > > Submitted by: Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> > MFC after: 1 week > > Modified: > head/sys/net/if_lagg.c > > Modified: head/sys/net/if_lagg.c > ============================================================================== > --- head/sys/net/if_lagg.c Thu Jun 6 16:20:50 2019 (r348744) > +++ head/sys/net/if_lagg.c Thu Jun 6 16:22:29 2019 (r348745) > @@ -1955,12 +1955,10 @@ lagg_link_active(struct lagg_softc *sc, struct lagg_po > * Search a port which reports an active link state. > */ > > - /* > - * This is called with either LAGG_RLOCK() held or > - * LAGG_XLOCK(sc) held. > - */ > +#ifdef INVARIANTS > if (!in_epoch(net_epoch_preempt)) > LAGG_XLOCK_ASSERT(sc); > +#endif
FWIW, the comment wasn't stale but on purpose (I added it when I added the check). The idea is to be the equivalent of assert(in_epoch(net_epoch_preempt) || lagg_xlocked(sc)) However, I couldn't write it that way, so I use LAGG_XLOCK_ASSERT when !in_epoch returns false. Note that LAGG_RLOCK == epoch_enter, hence why the comment isn't stale. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
