linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] staging: greybus: added comment to mutex declaration in fw-management.c

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2026020704-velocity-palpitate-afd2@gregkh>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2026 14:38:50 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Rachit Dhar <rchtdhr@...il.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
	Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>, greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] staging: greybus: added comment to mutex
 declaration in fw-management.c

On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 06:30:03PM +0000, Rachit Dhar wrote:
> Added comment to mutex declaration, to resolve a checkpatch.pl check.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rachit Dhar <rchtdhr@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/greybus/fw-management.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-management.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-management.c
> index 152949c23d65..07a0e6b63cf3 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-management.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-management.c
> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ struct fw_mgmt {
>  
>  	/* Common id-map for interface and backend firmware requests */
>  	struct ida		id_map;
> -	struct mutex		mutex;
> +	struct mutex		mutex; /* protects fw_mgmt->disabled, and serializes ioctl */

How do you "know" that this is what it is for?

Fixing this type of checkpatch warning is hard, and requires lots of
documentation and checking.  If you didn't write the code originally, I
wouldn't worry about this type of issue at all, it's best for new code,
not existing code.

thanks,

greg k-h