Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-25410-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 22:49:01 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, keescook@chromium.org,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com,
	nicolas@fjasle.eu, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	vkoul@kernel.org, trix@redhat.com, ojeda@kernel.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, longman@redhat.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, cl@linux.com, acme@kernel.org,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org, irogers@google.com,
	adrian.hunter@intel.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
	bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
	frederic@kernel.org, quic_neeraju@quicinc.com,
	joel@joelfernandes.org, josh@joshtriplett.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
	rientjes@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
	42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, apw@canonical.com, joe@perches.com,
	dwaipayanray1@gmail.com, lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com,
	john.johansen@canonical.com, paul@paul-moore.com, jmorris@namei.org,
	serge@hallyn.com, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de, ravi.bangoria@amd.com, error27@gmail.com,
	luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/57] locking: Introduce __cleanup() based
 infrastructure
Message-ID: <ZaOD3UWFppRDJ6bs@google.com>
References: <20230612090713.652690195@infradead.org>
 <20230612093537.614161713@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230612093537.614161713@infradead.org>

Hi Peter,

On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:07:16AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>  
> +DEFINE_GUARD(mutex, struct mutex *, mutex_lock(_T), mutex_unlock(_T))
> +DEFINE_FREE(mutex, struct mutex *, if (_T) mutex_unlock(_T))

I got excited with the ability to have mutexes released automatically,
however the code I work with typically uses mutex_lock_interruptible()
and friends, where resource acquisition may fail. Additionally, the
return values are integers and not pointers, which makes them unsuitable
for something like

	struct mutex *guard __free(mutex) = mutex_lock_interruptible(...);

I guess we could make wrappers around mutex_lock...() family to return
either the mutex or ERR_PTR-encoded error, but that feels quite ugly.

Do you have any suggestions here?

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry