Re: [PATCH v3] rust: sync: Accept errors for Lock payload data

[Gary Guo]

On Fri Oct 16, 2026 at 1:09 PM BST, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> The `Lock` baseclass currently does not allow for fallible user-data.
> This can cause conflicts when used with other primitives, for example
> when a lock shall be pin-initialized with payload data that is fallible.
>
> Add support for the lock base class so that it works with
> try_pin_init!(). Adjust spinlock and mutex accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Stanner <phasta@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
>   - Vertical formatting for imports
>
> Changes in v2:
>   - Don't import prelude in doctests. (Gary)
>   - Keep using pin_init! over try_pin_init! in Lock::new(). (Gary)
> ---
>  rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs          | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
>  rust/kernel/sync/lock/mutex.rs    |  6 +++---
>  rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs | 17 +++++++----------
>  3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> index 10b6b5e9b024..5bff5228ac16 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> @@ -7,11 +7,17 @@
>  
>  use super::LockClassKey;
>  use crate::{
> -    str::{CStr, CStrExt as _},
> +    str::CStr,
>      types::{NotThreadSafe, Opaque, ScopeGuard},
>  };
>  use core::{cell::UnsafeCell, marker::PhantomPinned, pin::Pin};
> -use pin_init::{pin_data, pin_init, PinInit, Wrapper};
> +use pin_init::{
> +    pin_data,
> +    PinInit,
> +    Wrapper, //
> +};
> +
> +use kernel::prelude::*;

This should be part of the `crate::` import.

>  
>  pub mod mutex;
>  pub mod spinlock;
> @@ -126,13 +132,18 @@ unsafe impl<T: ?Sized + Send, B: Backend> Send for Lock<T, B> {}
>  // data it protects is `Send`.
>  unsafe impl<T: ?Sized + Send, B: Backend> Sync for Lock<T, B> {}
>  
> +use core::convert::Infallible;

Should be part of import above.

> +
>  impl<T, B: Backend> Lock<T, B> {
>      /// Constructs a new lock initialiser.
> -    pub fn new(
> -        t: impl PinInit<T>,
> +    pub fn new<E>(
> +        t: impl PinInit<T, E>,
>          name: &'static CStr,
>          key: Pin<&'static LockClassKey>,
> -    ) -> impl PinInit<Self> {
> +    ) -> impl PinInit<Self, E>
> +    where
> +        E: From<Infallible>,
> +    {
>          pin_init!(Self {
>              data <- UnsafeCell::pin_init(t),
>              _pin: PhantomPinned,
> @@ -141,7 +152,7 @@ pub fn new(
>              state <- Opaque::ffi_init(|slot| unsafe {
>                  B::init(slot, name.as_char_ptr(), key.as_ptr())
>              }),
> -        })
> +        }? E)
>      }
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock/mutex.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock/mutex.rs
> index cda0203efefb..38d8fb9dad5d 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/sync/lock/mutex.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock/mutex.rs
> @@ -49,8 +49,8 @@ macro_rules! new_mutex {
>  /// }
>  ///
>  /// impl Example {
> -///     fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self> {
> -///         pin_init!(Self {
> +///     fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self, Error> {
> +///         try_pin_init!(Self {

The example don't need to be changed? The existing API would still work with
`pin_init!` with just `E` inferred to be `Infallible`.

Best,
Gary

>  ///             c: 10,
>  ///             d <- new_mutex!(Inner { a: 20, b: 30 }),
>  ///         })
> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ macro_rules! new_mutex {
>  /// }
>  ///
>  /// // Allocate a boxed `Example`.
> -/// let e = KBox::pin_init(Example::new(), GFP_KERNEL)?;
> +/// let e = KBox::try_pin_init(Example::new(), GFP_KERNEL)?;
>  /// assert_eq!(e.c, 10);
>  /// assert_eq!(e.d.lock().a, 20);
>  /// assert_eq!(e.d.lock().b, 30);