From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF5B919DF9A for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 16:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759077458; cv=none; b=hEEMPakDTXOLUjrLOjmVayyTqWTvKPEYud1Drui5EVP+5orkhRnvmheN9dj4yvU2WtWkc7HjtkNvc9ezULeIlb4I5B9PrOy901e3v9e/G6NafIClznhkDgdC2gTeKXmf/2qtUtCb6kcHHHN5/fBKZNjczMuAlfkx1pB/cxRbpXk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759077458; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BKWfA/h4SxKJDlKgt9ivrEnia+romN1DT6uF/si1tkE=; h=From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=HWFlJy07408yDowegI9wfZALZZP/tGzoQc8N+k8hGHQeZkktKG3XLmXjv3ro02X8p+VXbhqo0fRtFJHzKMO6C6rfxxovSRdi341Sz6p5gf5JOXipLtEyLRh/lrDdHz7w0axlOpZSyVw1KtelOxDxhDrc3FdN2dddHg8mY+hDgVI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=FHSwWl1j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="FHSwWl1j" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1759077455; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=swv9fBtSp+iULjidbET4cs1RqWXfeadmzES3l9MawZw=; b=FHSwWl1jNFcfvilocqwBooVJ3hOZIUB4veVoHttDH0e44GxP3wD8VWoke0VdST59cVclmY vvyLutAczrfoUH08pmyTB3/v2WVeMWt/djzXnemPMcAtep0HqmM1g3C32/7X14iJ+uWUgn jtvpG4uFD4tfll4lKM5dcXuRInC8Nhc= Received: from mail-qv1-f69.google.com (mail-qv1-f69.google.com [209.85.219.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-608-5AaPr6sONgymbwz08-ujYw-1; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 12:37:34 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 5AaPr6sONgymbwz08-ujYw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 5AaPr6sONgymbwz08-ujYw_1759077454 Received: by mail-qv1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-78f2b1bacfcso67837596d6.3 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 09:37:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1759077453; x=1759682253; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=swv9fBtSp+iULjidbET4cs1RqWXfeadmzES3l9MawZw=; b=aReroigetrncfWj1ycXNC4jP4mn0SQzCwmhdP2WvjbkzsYoY41GeHdwbsmPBwRpw2O E1XnPtPlUQnzS/r/0dxUVs4mOkqWMHhqM8F+yp9j/rY0kAJypvC+MgvV4ElZM507yFwC 5HPJwVmSNNnEr3Fh208StpS8l4oG9lvF6/uCoTjEl3tHo7kOr6L9oX1A54S+SFg1FL17 DDkNhqPxRR1Yli87kVLfd/QOYtxRgKTsGdKPhPhKjuioS1Bb7kr5lakOlUDuflFFBVeU KU5CBpGFV5d9+fu2zbsab/+tNHAo6WT2wwiLTXJKmEP9mtjoenoFsIuv3X2Hha3R7UME fbWQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUlduGlUAiO8q6AvoOK2hlMBN1G/bzqj0SvlcmFvKE+taICV7vcQkK/ROKSY9gk9PFz6N0fZ81HLsc2JwM=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxKO+2kt6rPGaxzWf5U3p1BalUKIMP7N2h34+4yFmtaV/DThJvJ KFMvzGT39WMm+r04CYizmbNg30cbtwlQvXFUBQGBbs2xsL8XbDb6tXCDhwUZCReigZauaP/Eom1 vCHNOZyoYdxFpe+Rnf+qjblOhu3HvGyo6KFUFxlFwCml/3pP6rP/hflBNFTrq4zJg2Q== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuLXg4ocP7vM03RqoQShiDISdcJOT4bHf56Tm1bgc+5WZzTORRj4XqDO8Bmet1 wHdnT56qNZ3LDUdwJG7RMvmVXUxIEyaRA0fXJirjlfzPb50wJ1qQK1MG75TGMeh4tT5yLfIVoNh xHc1xaJgCbCGy/g68zvof+Wc5sRoz1YkFWlQAV99uJk87ufgTrk5W860p93kAE3YfqX1/lofGZX qJWCUK7cCnmJLmT86aSnLjDB9a762hP0Bjk8zS+sSCN4tKOMo+XJ0StY5Hf7BRNrWdjh9hqG/Lv OEW8PJ1TzL5cd8cubRMu3zUjyYSdM07N+xZw3P/bUYrh96wmvWqimwn26X9AcSEgTx73qQquyig xf8N4m1UuCmo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d83:b0:805:b4cb:c97f with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-805b4cbc9b7mr158873176d6.27.1759077453722; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 09:37:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGg81LL1H79NDuoHDEQqMwVQw/x61llS9tHv8xrm7uBc1njZnVB3pO6TICwUrIpHKXRHX9j5A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d83:b0:805:b4cb:c97f with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-805b4cbc9b7mr158872976d6.27.1759077453358; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 09:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:188:c180:4250:ecbe:130d:668d:951d? ([2601:188:c180:4250:ecbe:130d:668d:951d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-8016cf8f949sm56583076d6.54.2025.09.28.09.37.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Sep 2025 09:37:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Waiman Long X-Google-Original-From: Waiman Long Message-ID: <78676863-593f-4823-9dc2-c08a36f86378@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2025 12:37:32 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/mutex: add MUTEX_WARN_ON to warn invalid mutex To: buckzhang1212 , "llong@redhat.com" Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "will@kernel.org" , "boqun.feng@gmail.com" , =?UTF-8?B?bGludXgta2VybmVsQHZnZXIua2VybmVs4oCm?= References: <20250927080018.13909-1-buckzhang1212@yeah.net> <73ba8425.3229c.19991241c52.Coremail.buckzhang1212@yeah.net> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <73ba8425.3229c.19991241c52.Coremail.buckzhang1212@yeah.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/28/25 12:24 PM, buckzhang1212 wrote: > Hey Long > you are right,lock->magic check can  help me to get what I want . > It's a bit late for me, and I want to get the  warning when I first > use  the invalid mutex. > Can I move the lock->magic check to  the mutex_lock? All the mutex_lock*() functions will eventually call __mutex_lock_common() or __mutex_trylock_fast() which also has the check . There is no need to duplicate the check in each of them. Cheers, Longman