Re: Thread Safety Analysis and the Linux kernel

[Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>]

On 3/6/25 1:47 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> That no longer works for the case of:
> 
> DEFINE_GUARD_COND(mutex, _try, mutex_trylock(_T))
> 
> which expands to have a constructor like:
> 
> static inline struct mutex * class_mutex_try_constructor(struct mutex *_T)
> {
> 	struct mutex * t = ({ void *_t = _T; if (_T && !(mutex_trylock(_T))) _t = NULL; _t; });
> 	return t;
> }

Hi Peter,

Would it be acceptable to introduce variants of the conditional locking
functions that return the mutex pointer instead of a boolean to indicate
whether or not locking succeeded? Would that be sufficient to change the
type of 't' above from 'struct mutex *' into 'struct mutex *const'? Two
examples of what such functions could look like:

struct mutex *mutex_trylock_ptr(struct mutex *mutex)
	__cond_acquires(nonnull, mutex)
{
	return mutex_trylock(mutex) ? mutex : NULL;
}

struct mutex *mutex_lock_interruptible_ptr(struct mutex *mutex, int *res)
	__cond_acquires(nonnull, mutex)
{
	int ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(mutex);

	if (res)
		*res = ret;

	return ret == 0 ? mutex : NULL;
}

Thanks,

Bart.