From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/locking/core] compiler-context-analysis: Support immediate acquisition after initialization
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 16:20:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260116152016.GI831050@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260116151043.GA18805@lst.de>
On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 04:10:43PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 04:07:50PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > LGTM; Steve, Christoph, does this work for you guys? Init and then lock
> > would look something like:
>
> Please do something that works without all these messy guards that just
> obfuscate the code.
I think we're doing to have to agree to disagree on this.
Something like:
scoped_guard (spinlock_init, &obj->lock) {
// init
}
is *much* clearer than something like:
spinlock_init(&obj->lock);
// init
spinlock_deinit(&obj->lock);
Exactly because it has explicit scope. (also my deinit naming might not
be optimal, it is ambiguous at best, probably confusing).
Not to mention that the scope things are far more robust vs error paths.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-16 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-15 0:51 [PATCH tip/locking/core] compiler-context-analysis: Support immediate acquisition after initialization Marco Elver
2026-01-15 17:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-01-15 17:58 ` Marco Elver
2026-01-15 18:04 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-01-15 21:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-16 1:17 ` Marco Elver
2026-01-16 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-16 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-01-16 15:20 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-01-16 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-16 15:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-01-16 15:37 ` Marco Elver
2026-01-16 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-19 9:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-01-22 1:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-01-22 6:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-01-22 9:15 ` Marco Elver
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260116152016.GI831050@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox