From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755328AbcFQO73 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:59:29 -0400
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:37800 "EHLO mga01.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751103AbcFQO71 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:59:27 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,484,1459839600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="830283527"
Subject: Re: initialize a mutex into locked state?
To: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
References: <55315ADD-4AE1-4EA4-8291-1B07F659BD99@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160617082559.GD30935@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <38111D58-C42F-4ED3-BC31-04884795BE38@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160617141912.GS30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <EDFA75CD-A3F5-4AA7-9FA2-7B7D61B6AAED@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160617143200.GU30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <17E58758-CA23-420D-89B4-50E71F8A6428@linuxhacker.ru>
 <1466174540.3596.16.camel@poochiereds.net>
 <E4F8DDF2-ACDE-4D7A-8133-E55CFA464751@linuxhacker.ru>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, mingo@redhat.com,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <d4e6ca53-79bc-b0ac-1a60-9460fe1bf856@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:59:25 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E4F8DDF2-ACDE-4D7A-8133-E55CFA464751@linuxhacker.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 6/17/2016 7:54 AM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>
> Yes, we can add all sorts of checks that have various impacts on code readability,
> we can also move code around that also have code readability and CPU impact.
>
> But in my discussion with Arjan he said this is a new use case that was not met before
> and suggested to mail it to the list.

I'm all in favor of having "end code" be as clear as possible wrt intent.
(and I will admit this is an curious use case, but not an insane silly one)

one other option is to make a wrapper

mutex_init_locked( )
{
	mutex_init()
	mutex_trylock()
}

that way the wrapper can be an inline in a header, but doesn't need to touch a wide
berth of stuff... while keeping the end code clear wrt intent