Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] loop: Add lock context annotations

On 8/3/26 6:11 AM, Nilay Shroff wrote:
> On 7/31/26 1:28 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Add lock context annotations that are compatible with Clang. Swap the
>> loop_ctl_mutex and loop_index_idr declarations such that __guarded_by(=
)
>> can be used.
>>
>> Cc: Nilay Shroff <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> =C2=A0 drivers/block/loop.c | 7 ++++++-
>> =C2=A0 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
>> index a71fe763c933..e2ac19de11f4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
>> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
>> @@ -90,8 +90,8 @@ struct loop_cmd {
>> =C2=A0 #define LOOP_IDLE_WORKER_TIMEOUT (60 * HZ)
>> =C2=A0 #define LOOP_DEFAULT_HW_Q_DEPTH 128
>> -static DEFINE_IDR(loop_index_idr);
>> =C2=A0 static DEFINE_MUTEX(loop_ctl_mutex);
>> +static __guarded_by(&loop_ctl_mutex) DEFINE_IDR(loop_index_idr);
>=20
> Can we define helper macro here, which is more readable?
>=20
> # define DEFINE_IDR_GUARDED(name, lock)\
>  =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 __guarded_by(&(lock)) DEFIN=
E_IDR(name);
>=20
> This is similar to what we have defined for guarded LIST_HEAD here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]=
/

Maybe I missed something but it's not clear to me how such a short macro
helps? It doesn't seem to improve code readability to me?

Thanks,

Bart.