On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:15:16AM -0700, Nikitas Angelinas wrote: > Since __MUTEX_INITIALIZER() is used on memory that is initialized to 0 > anyway this change should not have an effect, but it seems better to > initialize osq explicitly for completeness, as done in other macros and > functions that initialize mutex and rwsem. > > Signed-off-by: Nikitas Angelinas <[email protected]> > --- > include/linux/mutex.h | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h > index 515cff7..bff47f8 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mutex.h > +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h > @@ -129,10 +129,18 @@ do { > \ > # define __DEP_MAP_MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname) > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER > +# define __OSQ_MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname) \ > + , .osq = OSQ_LOCK_UNLOCKED > +#else > +# define __OSQ_MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname) > +#endif > + > #define __MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname) \ > { .owner = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0) \ > , .wait_lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(lockname.wait_lock) \ > , .wait_list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(lockname.wait_list) \ > + __OSQ_MUTEX_INITIALIZER(lockname) \
You don't need the lockname parameter for this macro. Will
