rust: sync: Refactor static_lock_class!() macro

By introducing a new_static() constructor, the macro does not need to go
through MaybeUninit::uninit().assume_init(), which is a pattern that is
best avoided when possible.

The safety comment not only requires that the value is leaked, but also
that it is stored in the right portion of memory. This is so that the
lockdep static_obj() check will succeed when using this constructor. One
could argue that lockdep detects this scenario, so that safety
requirement isn't needed. However, it simplifies matters to require that
static_obj() will succeed and it's not a burdensome requirement on the
caller.

Suggested-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>
Reviewed-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250811-lock-class-key-cleanup-v3-1-b12967ee1ca2@google.com

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions