Re: [PATCH] rtmutex: Introduce __cleanup() based infrastructure

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>]

On 2026-02-02 19:59:43 [+0100], Thomas Böhler wrote:
> > Do you plan to have any users of this?
> 
> No. I discovered this was "missing" while developing out-of-tree. I'm
> aware that an interface should have in-tree users, but I'm also a bit
> confused about who is using rt_mutex in-tree in the first place as it
> looks like there are only a handful of users.
> 
> I'll make sure to do more research before I might post a v2.
> 
> Please do tell me if this isn't going to be merged due to missing users,
> I'll drop this then. No problem, and sorry for the noise if that's the
> case. :)

if you grep for rt_mutex_unlock() you should see the users. Most of it
API which is unlikely to use it because not every lock has its matching
unlock within the scope.
The rcu user a bit "odd" so it would important to not get the compiler
to optimize it away (in case it would do such a thing).
The selftest is already complicated as well as the torture.
Most of the i2c abstracts its away so it can't use it.

This leaves us only with em28xx-i2c.c as the only possible user in-tree
if I did look right.

Sebastian