on Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 03:18:06PM -0400, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> > - statement about which locks are expected to be held and how.
> > - statement about which interrupts are expected to be masked or not.
> > - statement about what the function does, including what is considered
> 
> So, it's worth noting that 2/3 of these are things which can
> conceivably be checked automatically.  One way to do this is with
> run-time asserts of various forms.
> 
> Block comments saying "lock XXX must be held" are likely to rot over
> time (i.e., get out of synch with reality).  Assertions, on the other
> hand, will be tripped over if the code is used..

I noticed LOCK_ASSERT({!,}simple_lock_held()) in several places. Would this
suffice for statement #1?
Does the comment block above sys_setpgid() in sys/kern/kern_prot.c satisfy #3?