[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4545519.Kr6IHPvbv3@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:07:51 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, jamborm@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: This patch triggers a bad gcc bug (was Re: [PATCH] force inlining of some byteswap operations)
On Monday 18 April 2016 08:39:32 Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> I agree. So how should we work around the bug in this case? There have
> been several suggestions:
>
> - change wwn_to_u64() to __always_inline
>
> - change qla2x00_get_host_fabric_name() to skip the unnecessary call to
> wwn_to_u64()
>
> - revert one of the two commits:
> bc27fb68aaad ("include/uapi/linux/byteorder, swab: force inlining of some byteswap operations")
> ef3fb2422ffe ("scsi: fc: use get/put_unaligned64 for wwn access")
What about the patch to change get_unaligned_be64() that I posted?
I think we want to merge that anyway, I just don't know if that helps
with this particular problem as well.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists