Re: [PATCH] null_blk: initialize lock mutex before registering configfs subsystem

[Bart Van Assche]

> diff --git a/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c b/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c
> index f8c0fd57e041..98616d290c5c 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c
> @@ -2161,13 +2161,12 @@ static int __init null_init(void)
>   
>   	config_group_init(&nullb_subsys.su_group);
>   	mutex_init(&nullb_subsys.su_mutex);
> +	mutex_init(&lock);
>   
>   	ret = configfs_register_subsystem(&nullb_subsys);
>   	if (ret)
>   		return ret;
>   
> -	mutex_init(&lock);
> -
>   	null_major = register_blkdev(0, "nullb");
>   	if (null_major < 0) {
>   		ret = null_major;

Why an explicit mutex_init() call instead of changing "static struct
mutex lock" into "static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock)"? Additionally, shouldn't
the "lock" name be made more descriptive since it has file scope?

Thanks,

Bart.