Re: [PATCH v2] staging: nvec: use guard(mutex) in nvec_write_sync()

[Jeremy Dean Clifton]

On 10/13/26 12:15 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 10:29:26PM +0000, Jeremy Dean Clifton wrote:
> > The three return paths of nvec_write_sync() each release
> > sync_write_mutex with explicit unlock calls.
> >
> > Use guard(mutex) to unlock the lock automatically on any return
> > path.
> >
> > This removes the three mutex_unlock() calls.
> >
> > No functional change.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Dean Clifton <deaner92@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v2:
> >   - Reword the commit message to state the motivation and to make
> >     clear that removing the mutex_unlock() calls is the result of
> >     the change (Julia Lawall).
> > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20261012171312.5998-1-deaner92@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> Please read the archives for why I will not take guard() rewrites of
> staging drivers (nor do I want to see you use a LLM in here either.)
>
> sorry,
>
> greg k-h

Hello Greg + Everyone,


It turns out that I was unknowingly subscribed to this list and started 
creating patches for the Outreachy group without ever having submitted 
an application to Outreachy. I just wanted to learn how to contribute to 
the Linux Kernel and I saw https://kernelnewbies.org/ as a direct 
connection to Outreachy.

While I am technically not part of this cohort, I can still review 
patches. What is preferred?

I assume that the same rules apply outside of Outreachy? No LLMs and no 
guard() rewrites.

Jeremy