[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj5BnPvhmFkXuTJKHawi9kRQsFQDO44GQ4XzqJbwupSWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2021 11:06:12 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] core/urgent for v5.14-rc3
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 2:23 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> A single update for the boot code to prevent aggressive un-inlining which
> causes a section mismatch.
Argh, I did my usual allmodconfig build tests and this looked clean,
and I've already pushed it out.
But I do my clang builds separately, and that showed the bug:
> -static inline void idle_init(unsigned int cpu)
> +static inline void __always_inline idle_init(unsigned int cpu)
Yeah, that's a bit too many "inline"s, and clang quite reasonably
warns about it:
kernel/smpboot.c:50:20: warning: duplicate 'inline' declaration
specifier [-Wduplicate-decl-specifier]
Plus now that I look at it, it also has that __always_inline misplaced
- we should put things like "static" and "inline" (and
"__always_inline") before the function type specifiers.
So that function definition _should_ have been
static __always_inline void idle_init(unsigned int cpu)
instead.
Oh well. I'll fix it up as a separate patch. I wish I had done the
clang build before pushing it out - and I wish the -tip tree started
tested clang as well at least in _some_ configuration.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists