Re: (subset) [PATCH v7 2/3] leds: lp8860: Check return value of devm_mutex_init()

[Lee Jones]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:

> On 2025-06-25 10:04:39+0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2025, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > On 2025-06-19 13:34:56+0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 19:08:13 +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > > > devm_mutex_init() can fail. With CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=y the mutex will be
> > > > > marked as unusable and trigger errors on usage.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Add the missed check.
> > > > 
> > > > Applied, thanks!
> > > > 
> > > > [2/3] leds: lp8860: Check return value of devm_mutex_init()
> > > >       commit: 426e0c8e8eed26b67bbbd138483bb5973724adae
> > > 
> > > Thanks, but (as mentioned in the cover letter) these patches should go
> > > together through the mutex/locking tree.
> > > Could you drop it on your side and give an Ack instead?
> > 
> > There has to be good reasons to do this.
> >
> > I didn't see any dependents or dependencies in this patch.
> 
> Patch 3 depends on patch 1 and 2.
> 
> It will break the build for each instance of an ignored return value
> of devm_mutex_init(). Therefore all such instances need to be resolved
> before the patch can be applied.
> So the patches can't go through different trees.
> 
> In theory we could fix the drivers in this cycle and then change
> devm_mutex_init() in the next one. But new regressions are introduced
> over and over. This patch is already in the third cycle...

Fair point.

Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx>

And patch removed from LEDs.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]