On 09/07, Gregory Price wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 04:13:31PM +0800, Ye Liu wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/hung_task.c
> > +++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
> > @@ -315,13 +315,12 @@ static void check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks(unsigned
> > long timeout)
> > return;
> >
> > this_round_count = 0;
> > - rcu_read_lock();
> > - for_each_process_thread(g, t) {
> > + for_each_process_thread_rculock(g, t) {
> > if (!max_count--)
> > - goto unlock;
> > + goto out;
> ... snip ...
> > - unlock:
> > - rcu_read_unlock();
> > -
> > +out:
> > if (!this_round_count)
> > return;
> >
>
> The sunken rcu_read_lock()/unlock() + scoped_guard usage makes this goto
> at a minimum very confusing, if not actually broken.
I am afraid I misunderstood you concerns...
This patch renames the "unlock:" label to "out:", and to me this makes sense.
Unfortunately for_each_process_thread() and the new helper can't use "break".
Oleg.
