[PATCH v5 02/10] locking/mutex: introduce devm_mutex_init

[George Stark]

Hello Andy

On 3/7/24 13:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 4:40 AM George Stark <gnstark at salutedevices.com> wrote:
>>
>> Using of devm API leads to a certain order of releasing resources.
>> So all dependent resources which are not devm-wrapped should be deleted
>> with respect to devm-release order. Mutex is one of such objects that
>> often is bound to other resources and has no own devm wrapping.
>> Since mutex_destroy() actually does nothing in non-debug builds
>> frequently calling mutex_destroy() is just ignored which is safe for now
>> but wrong formally and can lead to a problem if mutex_destroy() will be
>> extended so introduce devm_mutex_init()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: George Stark <gnstark at salutedevices.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at csgroup.eu>
> 
>>   Hello Christophe. Hope you don't mind I put you SoB tag because you helped alot
>>   to make this patch happen.
> 
> You also need to figure out who should be the author of the patch and
> probably add a (missing) Co-developed-by. After all you should also
> follow the correct order of SoBs.
> 

Thanks for the review.
I explained in the other letter as I see it. So I'd leave myself
as author and add appropriate tag with Christophe's name.
BTW what do you mean by correct SoB order?
Is it alphabetical order or order of importance?

-- 
Best regards
George