Re: [PATCH RFC v4-bis] locking: introduce devm_mutex_init
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2023-12-15 15:59:21
Also in:
linux-leds, lkml
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 8:23 AM Christophe Leroy [off-list ref] wrote:
From: George Stark <redacted> Using of devm API leads to a certain order of releasing resources. So all dependent resources which are not devm-wrapped should be deleted with respect to devm-release order. Mutex is one of such objects that often is bound to other resources and has no own devm wrapping. Since mutex_destroy() actually does nothing in non-debug builds frequently calling mutex_destroy() is just ignored which is safe for now but wrong formally and can lead to a problem if mutex_destroy() will be extended so introduce devm_mutex_init()
Missing period. ...
} while (0) #endif /* CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
^^^ (1)
+struct device; + +/* + * devm_mutex_init() registers a function that calls mutex_destroy() + * when the ressource is released. + * + * When mutex_destroy() is a not, there is no need to register that + * function. + */ +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
Shouldn't this be #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES) && !defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) (see (1) as well)?
+void mutex_destroy(struct mutex *lock);
+int devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex *lock);
+#else
+static inline void mutex_destroy(struct mutex *lock) {}
+
+static inline int devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex *lock)
+{
+ mutex_init(lock);
+ return 0;
+}
+#endif-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko