linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Don't mark shared helper functions as inline

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130112003758.4361.99977@quantum>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:37:58 -0800
From:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
To:	Russ Dill <Russ.Dill@...com>, Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com>
Cc:	"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM Kernel List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't mark shared helper functions as inline

Quoting Russ Dill (2012-11-27 09:52:50)
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Russ Dill (2012-11-26 11:20:09)
> > > The helper functions that access the opaque struct clk should
> > > not be marked inline since they are contained in clk.c, but expected
> > > to be used by other compilation units. This causes compile errors
> > > under gcc-4.7
> > >
> > > In file included from arch/arm/mach-omap2/clockdomain.c:25:0:
> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clockdomain.c: In function ‘clkdm_clk_disable’:
> > > include/linux/clk-provider.h:338:12: error: inlining failed in call to always_inline ‘__clk_get_enable_count’: function body not available
> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clockdomain.c:1001:28: error: called from here
> > > make[1]: *** [arch/arm/mach-omap2/clockdomain.o] Error 1
> > > make: *** [arch/arm/mach-omap2] Error 2
> > >
> >
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> > A fix for this was merged into rc7.  See 93532c8a, "clk: remove inline
> > usage from clk-provider.h".
> >
> > Regardless, I'm still considering this patch.  I've heard many times
> > that we should trust the compiler to optimize for us and some folks look
> > down on inlining in general.  If anyone has an opinion on removing
> > inlines from the common clk core then please do speak up.
> >
> > Russ, can you update to the latest rc and verify if that fix is enough
> > for you?
> 
> Yes, that commit fixes the compile issue too. I'd go with the more
> complete removal of inlines though. If you have a declaration in a
> header, it makes no sense to call it inline in the .c
> 

Hi Russ,

I've taken this into clk-next.

Thanks,
Mike

> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Russ Dill <Russ.Dill@...com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/clk/clk.c            | 14 +++++++-------
> > >  include/linux/clk-provider.h |  4 ++--
> > >  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> > > index 56e4495e..ed01746 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> > > @@ -249,32 +249,32 @@ late_initcall(clk_disable_unused);
> > >
> > >  /***    helper functions   ***/
> > >
> > > -inline const char *__clk_get_name(struct clk *clk)
> > > +const char *__clk_get_name(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? NULL : clk->name;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline struct clk_hw *__clk_get_hw(struct clk *clk)
> > > +struct clk_hw *__clk_get_hw(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? NULL : clk->hw;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline u8 __clk_get_num_parents(struct clk *clk)
> > > +u8 __clk_get_num_parents(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? -EINVAL : clk->num_parents;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline struct clk *__clk_get_parent(struct clk *clk)
> > > +struct clk *__clk_get_parent(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? NULL : clk->parent;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline int __clk_get_enable_count(struct clk *clk)
> > > +int __clk_get_enable_count(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? -EINVAL : clk->enable_count;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline int __clk_get_prepare_count(struct clk *clk)
> > > +int __clk_get_prepare_count(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? -EINVAL : clk->prepare_count;
> > >  }
> > > @@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ out:
> > >         return ret;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -inline unsigned long __clk_get_flags(struct clk *clk)
> > > +unsigned long __clk_get_flags(struct clk *clk)
> > >  {
> > >         return !clk ? -EINVAL : clk->flags;
> > >  }
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > > index c127315..f9f5e9e 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > > @@ -335,8 +335,8 @@ const char *__clk_get_name(struct clk *clk);
> > >  struct clk_hw *__clk_get_hw(struct clk *clk);
> > >  u8 __clk_get_num_parents(struct clk *clk);
> > >  struct clk *__clk_get_parent(struct clk *clk);
> > > -inline int __clk_get_enable_count(struct clk *clk);
> > > -inline int __clk_get_prepare_count(struct clk *clk);
> > > +int __clk_get_enable_count(struct clk *clk);
> > > +int __clk_get_prepare_count(struct clk *clk);
> > >  unsigned long __clk_get_rate(struct clk *clk);
> > >  unsigned long __clk_get_flags(struct clk *clk);
> > >  int __clk_is_enabled(struct clk *clk);
> > > --
> > > 1.8.0
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/