locking/mutex: Clarify that mutex_unlock(), and most other sleeping locks, can still use the lock object after it's unlocked

Clarify the mutex lock lifetime rules a bit more.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201121808.GL3818@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net

Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst

@@ -101,12 +101,24 @@ features that make lock debugging easier and faster:
     - Detects multi-task circular deadlocks and prints out all affected
       locks and tasks (and only those tasks).
 
-Releasing a mutex is not an atomic operation: Once a mutex release operation
+Mutexes - and most other sleeping locks like rwsems - do not provide an
-has begun, another context may be able to acquire the mutex before the release
+implicit reference for the memory they occupy, which reference is released
-operation has fully completed. The mutex user must ensure that the mutex is not
+with mutex_unlock().
-destroyed while a release operation is still in progress - in other words,
+
-callers of mutex_unlock() must ensure that the mutex stays alive until
+[ This is in contrast with spin_unlock() [or completion_done()], which
-mutex_unlock() has returned.
+  APIs can be used to guarantee that the memory is not touched by the
+  lock implementation after spin_unlock()/completion_done() releases
+  the lock. ]
+
+mutex_unlock() may access the mutex structure even after it has internally
+released the lock already - so it's not safe for another context to
+acquire the mutex and assume that the mutex_unlock() context is not using
+the structure anymore.
+
+The mutex user must ensure that the mutex is not destroyed while a
+release operation is still in progress - in other words, callers of
+mutex_unlock() must ensure that the mutex stays alive until mutex_unlock()
+has returned.
 
 Interfaces
 ----------