> motivation of introducing __f_unlock_pos() in the first place? It has one
May I venture a guess:
CALL ../scripts/checksyscalls.sh
INSTALL libsubcmd_headers
INSTALL libsubcmd_headers
CC fs/read_write.o
In file included from ../fs/read_write.c:12:
../include/linux/file.h:78:27: error: incomplete definition of type 'struct file'
78 | mutex_unlock(&fd_file(f)->f_pos_lock);
| ~~~~~~~~~~^
If you don't include linux/fs.h before linux/file.h you'd get compilation
errors and we don't want to include linux/fs.h in linux/file.h.
I wouldn't add another wrapper for lock though. Just put a comment on top of
__f_unlock_pos().
