Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 29 Jul 2019 13:07:27 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex: Use mutex flags macro instead of hard
 code value
Message-ID: <20190729110727.GB31398@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1564397578-28423-1-git-send-email-mojha@codeaurora.org>
 <1564397578-28423-2-git-send-email-mojha@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1564397578-28423-2-git-send-email-mojha@codeaurora.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:22:58PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> Let's use the mutex flag macro(which got moved from mutex.c
> to linux/mutex.h in the last patch) instead of hard code
> value which was used in __mutex_owner().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/mutex.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h
> index 79b28be..c3833ba 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mutex.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ struct mutex {
>   */
>  static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
>  {
> -	return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~0x07);
> +	return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
>  }

I would _much_ rather move __mutex_owner() out of line, you're exposing
far too much stuff.