[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9e01d23e0711c3a3ec17c251277c58ff8aa3657.camel@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 20:22:41 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>, "Martin K. Petersen"
<martin.petersen@...cle.com>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, rust-for-linux
<rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ksummit@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Rust kernel policy
On Wed, 2025-02-19 at 11:33 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> But we should be encouraging the use of:
>
> scoped_guard(mutex)(&my_mutex) {
> /* Do the work needed for for my_mutex */
> }
>
> Which does work out very well. And the fact that the code guarded by
> the
> mutex is now also indented, it makes it easier to review.
I just discovered this two days working while working on a new
V4L2 driver. They are a gem! Definitely will decorate most of
lock use with them for the RFC patch set.
Don't need must pitch with those tbh...
>
> -- Steve
>
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists