Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] iio: dac: ad5686: read_raw/write_raw: use guard(mutex)()

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 10:09:51AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> On 7/10/26 6:20 AM, Rodrigo Alencar via B4 Relay wrote:

> > Use guarded mutex lock to facilitate code review when adding new
> > attributes. This will allow for early returns, avoiding error-prone
> > locking and unlocking in error paths. This also adds missing include
> > linux/cleanup.h. Gain-control support will allow the scale attribute
> > to be configurable.

...

> > +	guard(mutex)(&st->lock);
> 
> The commit message should explain why the location we are taking the lock
> has moved. Although, I don't see a reason to move it.

As I understand it's a compromise between simplicity and extra expressions that
are appear under the lock. Since it's mutex and not a spinlock, and the code is
not an utterly hotpath (something like very core kernel stuff), I think this
is okay. And IIRC there was even Jonathan's suggestion to go this way (maybe not
in this series, but semantically the same situation).

So, for the sake of simplicity, I am fine with this
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko