linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1f3395cb-ebab-44cd-b2b1-716e0130abad@salutedevices.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 18:30:42 +0300
From: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
	Marek Behún <marek.behun@....cz>, Waiman Long
	<longman@...hat.com>
CC: "andy.shevchenko@...il.com" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, "pavel@....cz"
	<pavel@....cz>, "lee@...nel.org" <lee@...nel.org>, "vadimp@...dia.com"
	<vadimp@...dia.com>, "mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	"npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>, "hdegoede@...hat.com"
	<hdegoede@...hat.com>, "mazziesaccount@...il.com" <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
	"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
	"boqun.feng@...il.com" <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "nikitos.tr@...il.com"
	<nikitos.tr@...il.com>, "kabel@...nel.org" <kabel@...nel.org>,
	"linux-leds@...r.kernel.org" <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"kernel@...utedevices.com" <kernel@...utedevices.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex_init

Hello Christophe

On 3/12/24 14:51, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 12/03/2024 à 12:39, George Stark a écrit :
>> [Vous ne recevez pas souvent de courriers de gnstark@...utedevices.com.
>> Découvrez pourquoi ceci est important à
>> https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]

..

> You don't need that inline function, just change debug_devm_mutex_init()
> to __devm_mutex_init().

I stuck to debug_* name because mutex-debug.c already exports a set
of debug_ calls so...
Well it's not essential anyway. Here's the next try:

diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h
index 67edc4ca2bee..537b5ea18ceb 100644
--- a/include/linux/mutex.h
+++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
@@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
  #include <linux/cleanup.h>
  #include <linux/mutex_types.h>

+struct device;
+
  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
  # define __DEP_MAP_MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname)			\
  		, .dep_map = {					\
@@ -117,6 +119,29 @@ do {							\
  } while (0)
  #endif /* CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */

+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
+
+int __devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex *lock);
+
+#else
+
+static inline int __devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex *lock)
+{
+	/*
+	 * When CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES is off mutex_destroy is just a nop so
+	 * no really need to register it in devm subsystem.
+	 */
+	return 0;
+}
+
+#endif
+
+#define devm_mutex_init(dev, mutex)			\
+({							\
+	mutex_init(mutex);				\
+	__devm_mutex_init(dev, mutex);			\
+})
+
  /*
   * See kernel/locking/mutex.c for detailed documentation of these APIs.
   * Also see Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst.
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c b/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c
index bc8abb8549d2..6aa77e3dc82e 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
  #include <linux/kallsyms.h>
  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
  #include <linux/debug_locks.h>
+#include <linux/device.h>

  #include "mutex.h"

@@ -89,6 +90,16 @@ void debug_mutex_init(struct mutex *lock, const char 
*name,
  	lock->magic = lock;
  }

+static void devm_mutex_release(void *res)
+{
+	mutex_destroy(res);
+}
+
+int __devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex *lock)
+{
+	return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, devm_mutex_release, lock);
+}
+
  /***
   * mutex_destroy - mark a mutex unusable
   * @lock: the mutex to be destroyed
-- 
2.25.1



>> +
>> +#else
>> +
>> +static inline int __devm_mutex_init(struct device *dev, struct mutex
>> *lock)
>> +{
>> +       /*
>> +       * When CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES is off mutex_destroy is just a nop so
>> +       * no really need to register it in devm subsystem.
>> +       */
> 
> Don't know if it is because tabs are replaced by blanks in you email,
> but the stars should be aligned

Ack


-- 
Best regards
George