[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0BN3p0F3UAxs9TKsHs--AiAPE0uf6126GVJNhmVTGCsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:18:21 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: mark some mpspec inline functions as __init
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:45 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:22:41PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > -static inline void get_smp_config(void)
> > +static inline __init void get_smp_config(void)
>
> __always_inline then I guess.
>
> Not inlining those is just silly.
Either way works correctly, I don't care much, but picked the __init
annotation as it seemed more intuitive. If the compiler decides to
make it out-of-line for whatever reason, I see no point in telling it
otherwise, even though I agree it is a bit silly.
Should I send the patch with __always_inline?
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists