Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

From: Peter Zijlstra <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 20:29:03 +0200

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:14:29PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote:
> The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
> sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
> jump label table.

It also doesn't hurt to have it. Its better to be consistent and
conservative with locking unless there is a pressing need.