Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-99661-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Message-ID: <fb7e3e79-d0ce-4142-b372-a0ee0a8a3036@salutedevices.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 02:31:25 +0300
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex_init
Content-Language: en-US
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	"andy.shevchenko@gmail.com" <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>, "pavel@ucw.cz"
	<pavel@ucw.cz>, "lee@kernel.org" <lee@kernel.org>, "vadimp@nvidia.com"
	<vadimp@nvidia.com>, "mpe@ellerman.id.au" <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	"npiggin@gmail.com" <npiggin@gmail.com>, "hdegoede@redhat.com"
	<hdegoede@redhat.com>, "mazziesaccount@gmail.com" <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>, "mingo@redhat.com"
	<mingo@redhat.com>, "will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>, "longman@redhat.com"
	<longman@redhat.com>, "boqun.feng@gmail.com" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"nikitos.tr@gmail.com" <nikitos.tr@gmail.com>, "kabel@kernel.org"
	<kabel@kernel.org>
CC: "linux-leds@vger.kernel.org" <linux-leds@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"kernel@salutedevices.com" <kernel@salutedevices.com>
References: <20240307024034.1548605-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com>
 <20240307024034.1548605-3-gnstark@salutedevices.com>
 <598887eb-b1b9-4bc1-adf3-4fd758ac2d9f@csgroup.eu>
From: George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com>
In-Reply-To: <598887eb-b1b9-4bc1-adf3-4fd758ac2d9f@csgroup.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hello Christophe

On 3/7/24 16:50, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 07/03/2024 à 03:40, George Stark a écrit :
>> [Vous ne recevez pas souvent de courriers de gnstark@salutedevices.com. Découvrez pourquoi ceci est important à https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
>>
>> Using of devm API leads to a certain order of releasing resources.
>> So all dependent resources which are not devm-wrapped should be deleted
>> with respect to devm-release order. Mutex is one of such objects that
>> often is bound to other resources and has no own devm wrapping.
>> Since mutex_destroy() actually does nothing in non-debug builds
>> frequently calling mutex_destroy() is just ignored which is safe for now
>> but wrong formally and can lead to a problem if mutex_destroy() will be
>> extended so introduce devm_mutex_init()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
>> ---
>>    Hello Christophe. Hope you don't mind I put you SoB tag because you helped alot
>>    to make this patch happen.
> 
> Up to you, I sent a RFC patch based on yours with my ideas included
> because an exemple is easier than a lot of words for understanding, and
> my scripts automatically sets the Signed-off-by: but feel free to change
> it to Suggested-by:

Although we had close ideas for the final patch in v4
you encouraged me to do it in the right (=effective) way and go back
from devm-helpers.h to mutex.h in the first place, reinforced the 
concept with appropriate examples from existing code, reviewed a lot. 
Thanks. Probably Suggested-by: is more suited here

-- 
Best regards
George