On 2/19/25 9:07 PM, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 18:55:31 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 07:56:39 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
this field, we don't need to take lock, though taking the wait_lock may
still be needed to examine other information inside the mutex.
Do we need to take it just for accessing owner, which is in an atomic?
Updating the task_struct would be in the same location as the blocked_on is
anyway. I would make it into a wrapper function that is a nop when disabled.
Should we make it depends on DEBUG_MUTEXES too? I think no. We can introduce
a different kconfig and wrapper function which calls debug_mutex_*().
No, I don't think so. In fact, the mutex debug code can make use of the
new fields for additional checking. I believe DEBUG_MUTEXES should
select the new option.
Cheers,
Longman
