[v4,00/10] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

  This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.

The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().

After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
but fix drivers
2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister

So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
for mutex as it's often used resource.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383

Changelog:
v1->v2:
	revise patch series completely

v2->v3:
locking: add define if mutex_destroy() is not an empty function
	new patch, discussed here [8]

devm-helpers: introduce devm_mutex_init
	previous version [4]
	- revise code based on mutex_destroy define
	- update commit message
	- update devm_mutex_init()'s description

leds: aw2013: unlock mutex before destroying it
	previous version [5]
	- make this patch first in the series
	- add tags Fixes and RvB by Andy 

leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
	previous version [6]
	- make aw2013_chip_disable_action()'s body oneline
	- don't shadow devm_mutex_init() return code

leds: aw200xx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
	previous version [7]
	- make aw200xx_*_action()'s bodies oneline
	- don't shadow devm_mutex_init() return code

leds: lm3532: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
leds: nic78bx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
leds: mlxreg: use devm_mutex_init for mutex initializtion
leds: an30259a: use devm_mutext_init for mutext initialization
leds: powernv: add LED_RETAIN_AT_SHUTDOWN flag for leds
	- those pathes were planned but not sent in the series #2 due to mail server
	problem on my side. I revised them according to the comments.

v3->v4:
locking: introduce devm_mutex_init
	new patch
	- move devm_mutex_init implementation completely from devm-helpers.h to mutex.h

locking: add define if mutex_destroy() is not an empty function
	drop the patch [9]

devm-helpers: introduce devm_mutex_init
	drop the patch [10]

leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
	- add tag Tested-by: Nikita Travkin <nikita@trvn.ru>

[4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#mf500af0eda2a9ffc95594607dbe4cb64f2e3c9a8
[5] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#mc92df4fb4f7d4187fb01cc1144acfa5fb5230dd2
[6] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m300df89710c43cc2ab598baa16c68dd0a0d7d681
[7] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m8e5c65e0c6b137c91fa00bb9320ad581164d1d0b
[8] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/377e4437-7051-4d88-ae68-1460bcd692e1@redhat.com/T/#m5f84a4a2f387d49678783e652b9e658e02c27450
[9] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231213223020.2713164-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m19ad1fc04c560012c1e27418e3156d0c9306dd84
[10] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231213223020.2713164-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m63126025f5d1bdcef69bcad50f2e58274d42e2d7

George Stark (10):
  leds: aw2013: unlock mutex before destroying it
  locking: introduce devm_mutex_init
  leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
  leds: aw200xx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
  leds: lp3952: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
  leds: lm3532: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
  leds: nic78bx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
  leds: mlxreg: use devm_mutex_init for mutex initializtion
  leds: an30259a: use devm_mutext_init for mutext initialization
  leds: powernv: use LED_RETAIN_AT_SHUTDOWN flag for leds

 drivers/leds/leds-an30259a.c | 15 +++++----------
 drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c  | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c   | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
 drivers/leds/leds-lm3532.c   | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
 drivers/leds/leds-lp3952.c   | 21 +++++++++++----------
 drivers/leds/leds-mlxreg.c   | 17 ++++++-----------
 drivers/leds/leds-nic78bx.c  | 25 +++++++++++++------------
 drivers/leds/leds-powernv.c  | 23 ++++++++---------------
 include/linux/mutex.h        | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 10 files changed, 143 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
  

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, George Stark wrote:

> This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
> 
> The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
> is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
> led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
> may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
> 
> After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
> 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
> but fix drivers
> 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
> 
> So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
> driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
> for mutex as it's often used resource.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383
> 
> Changelog:
> v1->v2:
> 	revise patch series completely
> 
> v2->v3:
> locking: add define if mutex_destroy() is not an empty function
> 	new patch, discussed here [8]
> 
> devm-helpers: introduce devm_mutex_init
> 	previous version [4]
> 	- revise code based on mutex_destroy define
> 	- update commit message
> 	- update devm_mutex_init()'s description
> 
> leds: aw2013: unlock mutex before destroying it
> 	previous version [5]
> 	- make this patch first in the series
> 	- add tags Fixes and RvB by Andy 
> 
> leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
> 	previous version [6]
> 	- make aw2013_chip_disable_action()'s body oneline
> 	- don't shadow devm_mutex_init() return code
> 
> leds: aw200xx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
> 	previous version [7]
> 	- make aw200xx_*_action()'s bodies oneline
> 	- don't shadow devm_mutex_init() return code
> 
> leds: lm3532: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
> leds: nic78bx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
> leds: mlxreg: use devm_mutex_init for mutex initializtion
> leds: an30259a: use devm_mutext_init for mutext initialization
> leds: powernv: add LED_RETAIN_AT_SHUTDOWN flag for leds
> 	- those pathes were planned but not sent in the series #2 due to mail server
> 	problem on my side. I revised them according to the comments.
> 
> v3->v4:
> locking: introduce devm_mutex_init
> 	new patch
> 	- move devm_mutex_init implementation completely from devm-helpers.h to mutex.h
> 
> locking: add define if mutex_destroy() is not an empty function
> 	drop the patch [9]
> 
> devm-helpers: introduce devm_mutex_init
> 	drop the patch [10]
> 
> leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
> 	- add tag Tested-by: Nikita Travkin <nikita@trvn.ru>
> 
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#mf500af0eda2a9ffc95594607dbe4cb64f2e3c9a8
> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#mc92df4fb4f7d4187fb01cc1144acfa5fb5230dd2
> [6] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m300df89710c43cc2ab598baa16c68dd0a0d7d681
> [7] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231204180603.470421-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m8e5c65e0c6b137c91fa00bb9320ad581164d1d0b
> [8] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/377e4437-7051-4d88-ae68-1460bcd692e1@redhat.com/T/#m5f84a4a2f387d49678783e652b9e658e02c27450
> [9] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231213223020.2713164-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m19ad1fc04c560012c1e27418e3156d0c9306dd84
> [10] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231213223020.2713164-1-gnstark@salutedevices.com/T/#m63126025f5d1bdcef69bcad50f2e58274d42e2d7
> 
> George Stark (10):
>   leds: aw2013: unlock mutex before destroying it
>   locking: introduce devm_mutex_init
>   leds: aw2013: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
>   leds: aw200xx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
>   leds: lp3952: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
>   leds: lm3532: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
>   leds: nic78bx: use devm API to cleanup module's resources
>   leds: mlxreg: use devm_mutex_init for mutex initializtion
>   leds: an30259a: use devm_mutext_init for mutext initialization
>   leds: powernv: use LED_RETAIN_AT_SHUTDOWN flag for leds
> 
>  drivers/leds/leds-an30259a.c | 15 +++++----------
>  drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c  | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c   | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
>  drivers/leds/leds-lm3532.c   | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
>  drivers/leds/leds-lp3952.c   | 21 +++++++++++----------
>  drivers/leds/leds-mlxreg.c   | 17 ++++++-----------
>  drivers/leds/leds-nic78bx.c  | 25 +++++++++++++------------
>  drivers/leds/leds-powernv.c  | 23 ++++++++---------------

FYI: I'll conduct my review once the locking side is settled.

>  include/linux/mutex.h        | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  10 files changed, 143 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 
>
  

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:11:11PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, George Stark wrote:
> 
> > This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
> > 
> > The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
> > is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
> > led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
> > may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
> > 
> > After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
> > 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
> > but fix drivers
> > 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
> > 
> > So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
> > driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
> > for mutex as it's often used resource.
> > 
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
> > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383

..

> FYI: I'll conduct my review once the locking side is settled.

To reduce burden can you apply the first one? It's a fix.
  

On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:36:04PM +0300, George Stark wrote:
> This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
> 
> The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
> is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
> led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
> may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
> 
> After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
> 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
> but fix drivers
> 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
> 
> So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
> driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
> for mutex as it's often used resource.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383

Are you going to send an updated version with the amended second patch?
  

Hello Andy.


I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys 
from time to time.

Sure I can single out the fix-only patch I'll do it tomorrow.


On 2/9/24 20:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:11:11PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, George Stark wrote:
>>
>>> This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
>>>
>>> The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
>>> is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
>>> led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
>>> may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
>>>
>>> After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
>>> 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
>>> but fix drivers
>>> 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
>>>
>>> So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
>>> driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
>>> for mutex as it's often used resource.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
>>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
>>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383
> 
> ...
> 
>> FYI: I'll conduct my review once the locking side is settled.
> 
> To reduce burden can you apply the first one? It's a fix.
>
  

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:52 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevicescom> wrote:
> I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys
> from time to time.

I don't understand. According to v4 thread Christophe proposed on how
the patch should look like. What you need is to incorporate an updated
version into your series. Am I wrong?

> Sure I can single out the fix-only patch I'll do it tomorrow.

I believe it can be handled without issuing it separately. `b4` tool
is capable of selective choices. It was rather Q to Lee if he can/want
to apply it right away.

> On 2/9/24 20:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:11:11PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> >> On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, George Stark wrote:
> >>
> >>> This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
> >>>
> >>> The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
> >>> is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
> >>> led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
> >>> may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
> >>>
> >>> After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
> >>> 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
> >>> but fix drivers
> >>> 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
> >>>
> >>> So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
> >>> driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
> >>> for mutex as it's often used resource.
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
> >>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
> >>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> FYI: I'll conduct my review once the locking side is settled.
> >
> > To reduce burden can you apply the first one? It's a fix.
  

Hello Andy

On 2/12/24 12:53, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:52 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com> wrote:
>> I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys
>> from time to time.
> 
> I don't understand. According to v4 thread Christophe proposed on how
> the patch should look like. What you need is to incorporate an updated
> version into your series. Am I wrong?

We agreed that the effective way of implementing devm_mutex_init() is in 
mutex.h using forward declaration of struct device.
The only inconvenient thing is that in the mutex.h mutex_init() declared 
after mutex_destroy() so we'll have to use condition #ifdef 
CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES twice. Waiman Long proposed great cleanup patch [1] 
that eliminates the need of doubling #ifdef. That patch was reviewed a 
bit but it's still unapplied (near 2 months). I'm still trying to 
contact mutex.h guys but there're no any feedback yet.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231216013656.1382213-2-longman@redhat.com/T/#m795b230d662c1debb28463ad721ddba5b384340a


> 
>> Sure I can single out the fix-only patch I'll do it tomorrow.
> 
> I believe it can be handled without issuing it separately. `b4` tool
> is capable of selective choices. It was rather Q to Lee if he can/want
> to apply it right away.

Oh ok, that would be great.

> 
>> On 2/9/24 20:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:11:11PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, George Stark wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This patch series fixes the problem of devm_led_classdev_register misusing.
>>>>>
>>>>> The basic problem is described in [1]. Shortly when devm_led_classdev_register()
>>>>> is used then led_classdev_unregister() called after driver's remove() callback.
>>>>> led_classdev_unregister() calls driver's brightness_set callback and that callback
>>>>> may use resources which were destroyed already in driver's remove().
>>>>>
>>>>> After discussion with maintainers [2] [3] we decided:
>>>>> 1) don't touch led subsytem core code and don't remove led_set_brightness() from it
>>>>> but fix drivers
>>>>> 2) don't use devm_led_classdev_unregister
>>>>>
>>>>> So the solution is to use devm wrappers for all resources
>>>>> driver's brightness_set() depends on. And introduce dedicated devm wrapper
>>>>> for mutex as it's often used resource.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/
>>>>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mc132b9b350fa51931b4fcfe14705d9f06e91421f
>>>>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8704539b-ed3b-44e6-aa82-586e2f895e2b@salutedevices.com/T/#mdbf572a85c33f869a553caf986b6228bb65c8383
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> FYI: I'll conduct my review once the locking side is settled.
>>>
>>> To reduce burden can you apply the first one? It's a fix.
>
  

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 2:14 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevicescom> wrote:
>
> Hello Andy
>
> On 2/12/24 12:53, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:52 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com> wrote:
> >> I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys
> >> from time to time.
> >
> > I don't understand. According to v4 thread Christophe proposed on how
> > the patch should look like. What you need is to incorporate an updated
> > version into your series. Am I wrong?
>
> We agreed that the effective way of implementing devm_mutex_init() is in
> mutex.h using forward declaration of struct device.
> The only inconvenient thing is that in the mutex.h mutex_init() declared
> after mutex_destroy() so we'll have to use condition #ifdef
> CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES twice. Waiman Long proposed great cleanup patch [1]
> that eliminates the need of doubling #ifdef. That patch was reviewed a
> bit but it's still unapplied (near 2 months). I'm still trying to
> contact mutex.h guys but there're no any feedback yet.

So the roadmap (as I see it) is:
- convince Lee to take the first patch while waiting for the others
- incorporate the above mentioned patch into your series
- make an ultimatum in case there is no reaction to get it applied on
deadline, let's say within next cycle (if Lee is okay with a such, but
this is normal practice when some maintainers are non-responsive)

P.S. In case Lee doesn't want to take the first patch separately
(let's say this week), send a new version with amended patches
included.

> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231216013656.1382213-2-longman@redhat.com/T/#m795b230d662c1debb28463ad721ddba5b384340a
  

Hello Andy

On 2/13/24 13:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 2:14 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Andy
>>
>> On 2/12/24 12:53, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:52 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevices.com> wrote:
>>>> I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys
>>>> from time to time.
>>>
>>> I don't understand. According to v4 thread Christophe proposed on how
>>> the patch should look like. What you need is to incorporate an updated
>>> version into your series. Am I wrong?
>>
>> We agreed that the effective way of implementing devm_mutex_init() is in
>> mutex.h using forward declaration of struct device.
>> The only inconvenient thing is that in the mutex.h mutex_init() declared
>> after mutex_destroy() so we'll have to use condition #ifdef
>> CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES twice. Waiman Long proposed great cleanup patch [1]
>> that eliminates the need of doubling #ifdef. That patch was reviewed a
>> bit but it's still unapplied (near 2 months). I'm still trying to
>> contact mutex.h guys but there're no any feedback yet.
> 
> So the roadmap (as I see it) is:
> - convince Lee to take the first patch while waiting for the others
> - incorporate the above mentioned patch into your series
> - make an ultimatum in case there is no reaction to get it applied on
> deadline, let's say within next cycle (if Lee is okay with a such, but
> this is normal practice when some maintainers are non-responsive)

Well, it was interesting to know that there is such a practice.

Waiman Long has just updated his patches with mutex.h cleanup [1] so I
think we can wait for that series to be merged than I'll prepare may
patchseries with or w\o the first patch.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240213031656.1375951-4-longman@redhat.com/T/

> 
> P.S. In case Lee doesn't want to take the first patch separately
> (let's say this week), send a new version with amended patches
> included.

Ok

> 
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231216013656.1382213-2-longman@redhat.com/T/#m795b230d662c1debb28463ad721ddba5b384340a
> 
>