[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7e174d78-faa9-4d29-967f-c1b3dedb3ef8@csgroup.eu>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 18:17:24 +0000
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>, 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
Le 12/03/2024 à 16:30, 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 ]
>
> 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...
Ah yes you are right I didn't see that. On the other hand all those
debug_mutex_* are used by kernel/locking/mutex.c.
Here we really don't want our new function to be called by anything else
than devm_mutex_init so by calling it __devm_mutex_init() you kind of
tie them together.
> Well it's not essential anyway. Here's the next try:
Looks good to me.
>
> 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists